You are on page 1of 164


Tu-16 Badger
Versatile Soviet Long-Range Bomber

Yefim Gordon and Vladimir Rigmant

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



AIRCPIAFT Bi-monthrv
Enjoy unmatched anatysis of the wortd's military
aircraft and the forces that fly them
Over 100 fabutous action photographs every issue.
taken by some of the best photographers on the ptane'r
o Magnificent cotour artwork, plus detaited cutawavs
o Simpty the best coverage of men, the machines arc :^e
missions that make up today's wortd of mititary a"'a:':-


Tu-l 6 Badger
Versatile Soviet Long-Range Bomber


!,i.'" ,,,'. r'

Yefim Gordon and Vladimir Rigmant

ffi An 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 lntroduction ......3

Published by Midland Publishing Original translation by Alexander Boyd Chapters
4 Watling Drive, Hinckley, LE10 3EY, England Edited by Dmitriy Komissarov 1 Projectsand Prototypes............ B
Tel: 01455 254 490 Fax: 01455 254 495 Line drawings by Vladimir Klimov
and Andrey Sal'nikov
2 Tu- 1 6 Versions, Development
andSeriesProduction ..... 18

Midland Publishing and Aerofax are imprints of Design concept and layout 3 Production & Experimental Bombers
lan Allan Publishing Ltd @ 2004 l,4idland Publishing and Special PurposeVersions . . .. . . . . .23
Sue Bushell 4 TheMissileCarriers ........36
rldw ide d i stri b uti o n (except North Ame
lvlidland Counties Publications
ri ca) :
Printed in England by
5 Reconnaissance and ECM Versions.58
4 Watling Drive, Hinckley, LE10 3EY, England lan Allan Printing Ltd 6 OtherVersionsandTestbeds ......74
Telephone: 01 455 254 450 Fax: 01 455 233 737 Riverdene Business Park, Molesey Road 7 Structural Description .....89
Hersham, Surrey, KT12 4RG
E-mail: midlandbooks@compuserve,com
8 TheTu-l6inService .....103
All rights reserved. No part of this
N orth American trade d i str i butt o n : publication may be reproduced,
Specialty Press Publishers & Wholesalers lnc. stored in a retrieval system, transmitted ProductionList.... ...... ..125
39966 Grand Avenue, North Branch, MN 55056 in any form or by any means, electronic,
Tel 651 277 1400 Fax: 651 277 1203 mechanical or photo-copied, recorded
Tu-l6FamilyDrawings ......... 136
Toll free telephone: 800 895 4585 or otherwise, without the written The Tu-16 in Colour. . . . .145 permission of the publishers.

Title page: A pair of Tu-16K-10s is serviced in

an earthen revetment at a Soviet Navy airbase,
Note the concrete blast dellector behind the
aircrafi 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 night
sortie on a floodlit hardstand.
Yelim Gordon archive


da ".' *, i".
- *s$€f
The second half of the 1 940s found the aircraft at American military bases in Europe and Asia, range bomber, and currently all of them have
industries of the major world powers, the Soviet the political, economic and military centres of been reconverted back to their original role.
Union included, faced with the task of produc- America's allies, and American and British The British V-bombers were soon withdrawn
ing long-range bombers powered by turbojet naval concentrations, particularly aircraft carri- due to design faults like the Valiant or reborn,
and turboprop engines able to fly at cruising ers which presented a particular threat to the until recently retired from service, as in-flight
speeds close to Mach 1 while retaining the USSR. lt would also be capable of attacking the refuelling tankers like the Victor and Vulcan.
load-carrying and range capabilities of aircraft transatlantic supply routes, without which the The French Mirage lV nuclear bomber can, at a
Iike the American Boeing B-29 Stratofortress or ability of America's European allies to fight a stretch, be classified in this way due to its com-
its Soviet analogue, the Tupolev Tu-4. protracted defensive war against the USSR paratively small bomb load and relatively small
This necessity was dictated not only by the would be highly problematical. radius of operation.
cverallthrust of progress in aviation technology These naval and maritime considerations Thus the USSR remained alone among the
ilhe availability of gas{urbine engines and were, it should be said, cruclal for the USSR in world's major powers, designing and bullding
advancements in aerodynamics), the increased developing its long-range bombers and then, aircraft in the long-range bomber category with
potential of fighter aviation (the wide-scale from the late 1950s, equipping them to carry a persistence born of its unique geopolitical and
introduction of jet fighters capable of speeds air-to-surface missiles. The need to counter the techno-mjlitary situation, endowing them with
around 1,000km/h) and air defence systems West's enormous naval superiority, both in size ever new roles, and making them a permanent,
,,vith long-range detection radars, but also by a and expertise, demanded the development of a potent and continually updated response in the
new weapon - the atom bomb - which enabled class of aircraft able to operate effectively ruthless military-political game with the West
a comparatively small number of bombers to against the surface vessels of a potential now known as the Cold War. For many years
rnflict catastrophic damage on an enemy. enemy over the expanse of the world's oceans. one of the most prominent pieces in this game
The United States was the Jirst to produce a It is for this reason that the USSR, and the Rus- of world chess was the Soviet Tu-16 long-range
iong-range bomber powered by gasturbine sia of today, has constantly produced and bomber and its numerous modifications.
engines. The Boeing B-47 Stratojet, on which developed this particular type of aircraft - a The Soviet Air Force Command began to
,,vork was initiated in 1945, made its first flight in Iong-range bomber equipped with air-to-sur- formulate its requirements for a future long-
't947 and achieved initial operational capability face missiles - while its potential enemies in the range jet bomber immediately after the Tu-4
IOC) with the US Strategic Air Command in the West have not. From the 1950s through the began to enter service. The category of long-
early 1950s as a 'medium-range strategic '1980s the Soviet Long-Range Air Force and range bomber powered by gas-turbine englnes
ccmber'. It was followed by Great Britain with Naval Air Forces were equipped with a steady with pressurised crew positions and the follow-
,is trio of V-Bombers - the Vickers Valiant, Avro succession of such aircraft (Tu-.l6, fu-22, ing preliminary specification appeared in its
'./ulcan and Handley Page Victor - also fu-22M), one of whose basic applications was planning tor 1947-48:
nedium-range strategic bombers, which against naval targets, particularly aircraft carri-
served for many years as the basis for the ers with their formidable anti-aircraft defences. Maximum speed at1,000m 900km/h

tsritish nuclear deterrent. ln the West the category of medium-range Service ceiLing 15,000m
Range at optimum speed with
For the USSR the production of a long-range strategic bombers and air-to-surface missile
3,000k9 bomb load 6,000km
comber with an operational radius up to carriers gradually died out: the B-47 was retired
Time to reach 10,000m 10 minutes
3.000km was vitally important. Such an aircraft in the 1960s, the handful of Convair B-58 Hus-
Take-off run 1,200m
,vould form an effective counter, able to strike tler supersonic bombers were quickly with-
Landing run 800m
drawn due to technical and design failings and
Bomb load
The Boeing B-47 Stratojet (illustrated here by
replaced by a Iimited number of General
normal 3,000k9
a 8-478 on take-off) was one of the aircraft that
Dynamics FB-1 11As developed from the F-11 1
maximum 20,000k9
sparked the Tu-16's development. tactical fighter-bomber - but even these inade-
Crew 8
,ane's All the World's Aircraft quately fulfilled the role of the extinct medium-

Tupolev Tu1 6
At the time when the Tu'l6 came into being the
piston-engined Tu-4 (illustrated by a Kazan''built
example, c/n 220605) made up the backbone of
the Soviet long-range heavy bomber force' lt
was built at two ol the three factories which later
produced 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
progressed beyond prototype status and was
rather smaller than the Tu-'16, it provided design
experience which proved invaluable during the
development of the latter aircraft. Tupolev JSC

sights for the gun positions; overall fire control eras comprising two AFA-33-50 or 75 cameras
Defensive armament was to consist of two
radar; OPB vector-synchronised optical bomb (aerofotoapparaht) with plan and oblique
20mm or 23mm cannon with 200 rounds per power unit based on a
sight (optiche skiy bombardi rovochnyy pritsel) mountings; an auxiliary
gun (rpg) in a remote-controlled turret firing
linked to the autopilot and to the bombardier's generator driven by a petrol engine.
ahead; remote-controlled upper fuselage posi-
panoramic radar; AP-S autopilot; astrocom- It is evident from these specifications for a
tlon with two 20mm or 23mm cannon (a0orpg);
pass; aircraft sextant; ARK automatic radio future long-range bomber that the Soviet Air
ventral turret as for upper fuselage posiiion;
compass; RV-2 low-altitude radio altimeter Force Command was calling for a high-speed
rear gun turret comprising three 20mm or
(rahdiovysotomer); RV-10 high-altitude radio aircraft fitted with the very latest systems and
23mm cannon (400rPg).
altimeter; Meridian short-range radio naviga- able to carry out missions in the teeth of strong
The bomb load was io consist of all types of
tion (SHORAN) system; long-range radio navi- enemy air defences at any time of day or night,
bombs carried by the Tu-4, but, in addition'
gation (LORAN) system; enemy radar in any weather condrtions, and in a variety of
provision was to be made for carrying four of
deteciion and counter-measures equipment; theatres of operation. The early interest in the
the new W-1 000 or TAV-1 000 special bombs in
identificaiion friend-or-foe (lFF) equipment; aircraft's ability to carty a large air-to-surface
the bomb bay and for delivering the forthcom-
radar warning receiver (RWR) aleding the crew missile is also noteworthy.
ing Soviet atom bomb. A variant of the aircraft
of enemy fighter attacks; an 'autonavigator' The new bomber was to replace the obsoles-
was envisaged which would be able to carry a
(that is, navigation computer); RSB-D and cent Tu-4 (the prototype B-29 had first flown in
7.000-kg air-to-surface mlssile.
RSIU-3 communications and command radio fiaz) in Long-Range Aviatlon (the heavy
The following essential radio navigation and
sets; SCR-578 emergency radio; recce cam- bomber arm of the Soviet Air Force) service in
targeting equipment was to be installed: radar
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
rj' l 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

Tupolev Tu-1 6
This model of the'86'project shows how the
future Tu-16 ('88') began to take shape. The'86'
combines the underwing engine installation of
its precursors with a stepped nose
incorporating side-by-side seating lor the two
pilots. Note the chin radome and the dorsal gun
barbette 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 feature
with the '82' - and the lateral sighting blisters ,or
the gunner operating the ventral barbette which
are depressed to minimise drag. Tupolev JSC

wind tunnels at the Central Aero- & Hydro-

dynamics lnstitute named after Nikolay Ye
Zhukovskiy (TsAGl - Tsentrahl'nyy aero- i
ghidrodinamicheskiy institoot) and the study
of captured German material. ln the process
the aircraft designers had to solve a new series
of problems in aerodynamlcs in calculating the
strength of high aspect ratio swept wings, and ln the spring of 1948 the Tupolev OKB began OKB's experimental factory (plant No156) in
in studying stability and control characteristics work on an experimental swept-wing tactical Moscow and handed over for factory tests. The
and the behaviour of swept wings at speeds bomber, known at first merely as 'aircraft 82', prototype differed from the draft project in hav-
near the speed of sound. powered by two RD-45F or VK-1 turbojets and ing four pairs of wing fences, and lacked the
One of the first experimental design bureaux able to fly at speeds close to the speed of irreversible hydraulic actuators and the rear
to begin work on the design of bombers with sound (Mach 0.9-0.95). gun position.
swept wings and tail assemblies was the The initial project for 'aircraft 82' was a radi- The '82' made its first flight on 24th March
OKB-I56 design bureau (OKB = opytno-kon- cal modification of 'aircraft 73' (a prototype ver- 1949 with test pilot A D Perelyot at the controls.
strooktorskoye byuro) led by Andrey Niko- sion of the Tu-14 tactical bomber) with swept The report on the factory flight tests noted that
layevich Tupolev. The bureau, with the aid wings, two engines and a reduced crew of the bomber was stable and could be flown by
of colleagues from TsAGI and leading special- three. In this project the dorsal and ventral gun a pilot with average skills. The following data
ists in the field of aircraft structural strength, positions were deleted and replaced by a sin- was also obtained:
designed, built and bench tested wing models gle tail position with two cannon mounted one
with varying degrees of sweepback and above the other. The dimensions and flying Normal all-up weight 1 4,91 gkg
rigidity. Research was undertaken into a wing weight were significantly reduced (wing span
l\ilaximum all-up weight 1 B,339kg
with 35'sweep and an aspect ratio of between 17.5m, length 17m, and normal takeoff weight
Empty weight 11,226k9
6 and 1 1. The calculations for the root section about 13,000k9).
Maximum speed
of the sweptback wing posed particular prob- On 12th June 1948 the Soviet Council of Min-
at sea-level B70km/h
lems for the structural strength speclalists isters issued directive No2052-804 concerning
at 4,000m 931 km/h
since, in the preferred two-spar structure, the 'aircraft 82' which was given the official desig-
Time to reach 5,000m 5.8 minutes
forward spar was longer than the rear spar and nation Tu-22. Work on the draft project, which
Range 2,395km
carried the greater load. The distribution of differed only slightly from the original version of
Service ceiling 11,400m
stress flows in the wing centre section box 'aircraft 82', was concluded on22nd June 1948.
Take-off run 1 ,1 00m
and outer wing panels were studied in detail ln early 1949 the '82' prototype powered by
Landing run 550m
by structural speclalists at TsAGI under A M Klimov RD-45F engines was rolled out at the
Cheryomukhin, using paper models, then
metal models. The test results were used to
formulate an engineering methodology for
sweptback wings and tail surfaces. S N Kan, I A
Sverdlov and V F Kiselyov, eminent TsAGI
expefts on structural strength, also contributed
to this research work. As a result, when the
Tupolev OKB started work on designing its first
swept-wing bombers it already possessed an
understanding of how the wing structure would
behave and a formulated methodology for its
The 'aircraft 82' lu-82), which passed
its 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 the
cumulative experience gained enabled the
OKB to go to produce the outstanding Tu-16
long-range bomber. I

Tupolev Tu-1 6
At the same time as the factory tests were tak- sitated the introduction of the new concept of lL-30 bomber, a machine similar to the Tupolev
ing place, 'aircraft 82' was being prepared to 'recurrent turbulence' - an effect arising when '82', also remained a purely experimental air-
take part in the traditional flypast at Tushino. an aircraft flies at low altitude over ierrain with a craft.
During the dress rehearsal in the summer of complex relief (for example, plain - river - for- The '82' enabled the research on large air-
1949, while the bomber was flylng low over the est) - into the structural strength calculaiion craft with swept wings to be verified and was
Moskva River, it was caught in a series of ther- norms. After a series of tests, a method of allow- the first practical step towards the creation of
mals of varying intensity causing so-called ing for 'recurrent turbulence' was introduced the Tu-1 6 to be taken.
'recurrent turbulence' which broke the attach- into the practice of aircraft design. After the 'aircraft 82', OKB-156 began work
ments of one of the engines to its nacelle. Test The prototype 'aircraft 82' was really an on its f ully combat-capable version, designated
pilot A D Perelyot was injured when his face experimental machine for developing the con- 'aircraft 83', which possessed a full comple-
struck the instrument panel but managed to cept of swept-wing design and it was not pro- ment of offensive and defensive armament.
shut down the damaged engine and make a duced in series This was because The Soviet This differed from the prototype in having a
single-engine landing atthe airfield of the Flight Air Force had at that time fully effected the ser- longer fuselage measuring 19.925m and a
Research lnstitute named after Mikhail M Gro- vlce introduction of the ll'yushin lL-28 straight- crew of four, which included a gunner/radio-
mov (Lll - Lyotno-issledovatel'skiy institoot) in wing tactical bomber which was already in operator seated behind the pilot and control-
Zhukovskiy near Moscow. This incldent neces- series production. For the same reason the 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 at
plant 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 static
thrust 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 mainwheels
turned through 90" during retraction to lie flat
under the engine ietpipes. Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tul 6
wing span and wing area were increased and A cutaway drawing of the'491', showing the
greater fuel tankage provided. The nose position of the bomb bay aft ot the wing torsion
7.20n box carry-through structure, with luel tankage
-l ::ar became sharper, and the fuselage was recon-
'. 26,00m fore and aft ol it. Note that there were three
-; figured to house additional fuel tanks. The for- separate pressurised cabins; a reconnaissance
.. :'34 83,00m'
,. -;
ward undercarriage leg was fitted with twin camera was to be located ahead of the centre
:,leep 34.5"
- - ::^:^t rrii^ wheels, a single NR-23 cannon installed in the cabin. Tupolev JSC
tail position, and the PSBN radar replaced by
the improved PSBN-M. Figures for the revised
- - ^,:^ht
'86' are as follows: their stafting point and made the following
L:'cad 31,500k9
l---, ,: nht
27.4Bm - increase of the wing sweepback to 45"
Height 8,25m - increase of the wing dihedral to 4"
','t. -;lm speed
Wing span 27.49m - a complete revision of the wing centre section
990km/h Wing area 1 00m' - addjtion ol new wingtip fairings
a:6 000m 1,020km/h
::-3e rvith 1,000k9 bomb load
All-up weight - lengthening of the centre fuselage section
-i.3-of run 1,700m
Normal 30,000k9 - increased fuel tankage
Overload 42,000k9 - increasing the sweepback ofthe vertical and
5 Maximum speed at 4,000m 950-1,000km/h horizontal tail from 40" to 50";
Service ceiling 13,000m - lengthening ofthe nose undercarriage leg
,'/ork on the '486' was halted at the initial Range with 2,000k9 bomb Ioad 4,000km - radical changes to the main undercarriage legs
resign stage but served as the basis for the Take-off run 1,000-1,200m (which had single wheels of a new type)
.roject'86' long-range bomber. Landing run 500-600m

At the end of 1948 OKB-156 began work on Crew 6 To improve the aerodynamic shape of the
:'re 86' design - a long-range bomber with two engine nacelles, the cross-section of the
AM-02 gas turbines, each providing 4,7g0kg The research undertaken by OKB-156 in the AM-02's exhaust pipe was altered. The new
sratic thrust. The designers took the layout of course of work on the '86' showed that a viable cross-section (in the form of a figure-8) allowed
aircraft 486' as a starting point, but the '86' dif- long-range bomber could be created just by the nacelles' cross-section area to be reduced
'ered in having a larger bomb bay accommo- increasing the weight and dimensions of the and their aerodynamic qualities enhanced.
oating a normal load of 2,000k9 and a aircraft and by increasing the engine thrust by The project for the '491' bomber did not go
maximum load of 6,000k9, afuel load increased 150-200%, Work on the '86' bomber was dis- beyond the stage of technical consideration.
io between 5.2 and 17.2 melric tons, a greater continued at the preliminary design stage, but Preliminary calculations for the aircraft appear
iiying weight, and a wider fuselage. A second the configuration of the fuselage was subse- below:
pilot was included in the increased crew of six. quently used on the '88' (Tu-16) design to
Length 26.39m
The forward pressurised cabin was com- which the OKB now turned lts attention. The
pletely reconfigured to feature a stepped nose Height 7,50m
unavailability of the AM-02 engines made the
without the predecessor's fighter-type canopy OKB turn to the 4,500k9p TR-3 turbojet Wing span 2250n
covering the pilots' cockpit, and the designed by Arkhip M Lyul'ka's OKB-165. The Wing area 81.7m'
Wing sweepback 45,0"
gunner/radio-operator was repositioned to a new bomber project was known as the '87' and
Wing aspect ratio 6.2
separate station under a blister dome. The hardly differed from the '86'.
All-up weight
nose undercarriage leg was lengthened, the ln April 1949 OKB-156 produced the project
Normal 30,000k9
main undercarriage legs given twin wheels and 'aircraft 491' (denoting the first project for
0verload 42,700k9
speed-brake flaps were installed on the rear 1949), a faster version of 'aircraft 86'. With a
Empty weight 21,920k9
fuselage. Defensive armament was augmented wing sweep of 35' the reserve of power pro-
l\ilaximum speed at 6,500m 1,0B5km/h
by a single NR-23 cannon and a PSBN radar vided by the two AM-02 engines could not be
Service ceiling 1 3,500m
mounted in the nose. used to the fuli; it was therefore decided to use
Range with 2,000k9 bomb load 5,000km
The project for 'aircraft 86' was subsequently wings sweptback at an angle of 45'. The
Crew 6
revised. The fuselage was lengthened, the designers took the first version of the '86' as

Tupolev Tu-16
Chapter One

Projects and Prototypes

The'494' Jet Bomber (project) Sergey M Yeger's team joined in the work fol- The research incorporated all the results
The simultaneous quest by TsAGI and lowed by the remaining sections of the OKB. derived from 'aircraft 86', but increased them in
Tupolev's OKB-156 ended in a rational solution While the layout of the aircraft and the pro- the light of the new requirements. The aircraft's
to the many problems involved in the aerody- portions of its assemblies were being resolved, power unit was based on the Lyul'ka TR-3A
namic form of a heavy swept-wing aircraft. The Tupolev visiied S M Yeger's team each day and (AL-S) engine with a static thrust of 5,000k9,
most rapid progress was made in research on studied the progress in detail, he then went to and on OKB-165's projected turbofan engine
the '88' (Tu-16) long-range bomber project his office or to the mock-up shop where a (given the provisional designation TR-5) also
with, as its basis, the preliminary studies car- wooden mock-up of the aircraft was being made. with a static thrust of 5,000k9. Some prelimi-
ried out by TsAGI on the chosen layout with a Kondorskiy's team had the task of setting the nary revisions to 'project 494' were also made
wing possessing an aspect ratio of 7-9 and aircraft's basic parameters (wing area, weights, to accommodate the AMRD-03 engine with an
sweptback at an angle of 35". The prototype and power of the engines) with which, and a estimated thrust of B,200kg on which Mikulin's
was designated E-4 at TsAGl, and windtunnel crew of six, the following data were calculated: OKB-300 was then working.
tests with a model were made between 1947 The aerodynamic characteristics of the new
and 1950. The swept-wing chosen was in many Maximum speed aircraft were identical to those of the '86'
ways identical to that used by German design- at sea level 950km/h bomber, and some versions of the '494'
ers on the Junkers EF 132. at 10,000m 950-1,000km/h bomber were geometrically similar to the '86'.
Time to reach 10,000m 23 minutes The length of the bomb bay corresponded in
When SergeyV ll'yushin's OKB-240was com-
missioned to design a high-speed long-range jet Service ceiling 1 2,000-1 3,000m length to that of the rear bomb bay on the '85' -
Bange with normal bomb load 7,500km
bomber (subsequently designated lL-46), which held 6,000-12,000k9 of bombs - and the
Normal bomb load 6,000k9 weights of the structural elements for various
OKB-156 did not abandon its work on its com-
peting design and work continued with the aim Maximum bomb load 1 2,000k9 versions of the project were provisionally
Unassisted take-off run 1,800m based on their'86' equivalents.
of producing an aircraft with a higher pedor-
Landing run 900m Work on the '494' bomber within the B
mance than the lL-46. The initial research was M
Armament as Jor 'alrcraft 86' Kondorskiy team was the responsibility of I B
carried out by B M Kondorskiy's team, in which
young graduates of the Moscow Aviation lnsti- Babin, G A Cheryomukhin and VA Sterlin. The
tute, such as Andrey A Tupolev, G A Chery- These figures (apart from range and bomb team completed work on the project materials
omukhin, Yu Yu Yudin, I V Babin, and VA Sterlin, load) were essentially in line with those for the in June 1950, when the analysis and research
began their careers and went on to become the earlier '86' proiect, and the dimensions of resulted in a wing sweep of 36" and the follow-
OKB's leading experts and specialists. The first bomber'494' (the fourth project undertaken by ing alternative engine types:
draughting of the layout and the first calculations the Kondorskiy team in 1949) and were based
were done under the close scrutiny of Tupolev on data for the '86' project and on the papers - two AMRD-o3 engines;

who gave this project his particular attention. entitled Research into the Flight Characteristics
- four TR-3A (AL-5) engines;

Subsequently, when the aircraft's layout, dimen- of Heavy Swept-wing Jet Aircralt carried out by
- four TR-5 engines.

sions and correlations had been decided, OKB-156 in early 1948.

Various provisional layouts for the aircraft were
prepared depending on the choice of engines.
lf the AMRD-03 engines were used with a wing
area 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 37.1m
Wing span 34.8m
Wing area 160m'?
Take-offweight 96,000k9
Landing weight 41 ,000k9
Fuel load 48,000k9
Weight of engines B,300kg

The delinitive'88'was preceded by several

preliminary development proiects. This is the
'49411' - basically a scaled-up '491', the main
landing gear retracting into the engine nacelles
adhering directly to the wing undersurface.
Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tu-16
-ne 49412'featured podded engines and redesigned main gear units with The rather bizarre'49413'combined the main landing gear ol lhe'49412'
':ur-wheel bogies retracting aft into fairings protruding beyond the wing with two engines adhering to the torward luselage underside and two
Tailing edge - a trademark feature ol Tupolev aircraft designed in the more mounted on the wings, B-47 style. Tupolev JSC
'350s and 1960s. Tupolev JSC

-:e 49414' was even more hair-raising - basically the'49413' with two The ultimate cartoon - the'49415'had two engines under the nose and two
:.gines moved from the wings to a position atop the rear fuselage. This is at the wingtips. Tupolev JSC
nrere the unusual engine placement of the later Tu-22 ('105') comes trom,
_,:: :,,,JSC

- --e second version had podded engines with For the TR-3A and TR-5 engines, the following 3. This version had all the engines housed in
:-: main landing gear in separate wing fairings. layouts were proposed: pairs in wing fairings, one above the other,
--rs. for the first time, OKB-156 came up with with the maln undercarriage legs retracting
:- s method of housing the main undercarriage 1. With a wing area of up to 130-160m', two forwards into them. Depending on the type of
::s which became the 'trademark' of Tupolev engines would be located in the forward engines installed, the following date were
:.signs in the 1 950s and 1 960s. lt was based on fuselage and two on the wings between the flaps calculated:
3::man research derived from Gottingen in and the ailerons, with the undercarriage legs in
947 which incorporated the results of various separate wing fairings.
TR-34 TR-s

.', qd-tunnel tests of various ways of locating

Length 40.2m 40.2m
Wing span 38.8m 38.8m
:-cine nacelles relative to the wing: in front, 2, With a wing area greater than 130-1 60m', all four
Wing area 200m' 200m'
::neath, above and behind. Placing the engine engines would be iocated either in the fuselage,
Take-offweight 130,000k9 129,000k9
':. : ngs behind gave the minimum drag for the or two on the fuselage and two at the wingtips,
,', ng{airing combination. For this second or all four on wing pylons. All four layouts had
Landingweight 56,200k9 55,300k9
Fuel load 67,000k9 67,O0Okg
. ersron, the following data were calculated: the main undercarriage legs housed in separate
Weight of engines 13,700k9 12,700k9
wing fairings. The following data relates to the
:.selage length 37.0m last version mentioned:
,',' span
ng 34.8m For the TR-3A engines, a layout in which they
,'irng area 160m' Wing area 200m were housed in wing fairings in side-by-side
-ake-off weight 95,300k9 Take-offweight 127,000k9 pairs was proposed. The maln undercarriage
-anding weight 40,000k9 Landingweight 49,500k9 legs retracted into the engine fairings (special
=uel load 48,500k9 Fuel load 71,000k9 rear fuselage fairings). ln this form, the following
,'/eight of engines 7,200k9 Weight of engines 16,300k9 data applied:

Tupolev Tu-1 6
Length 32.7m This was because the interference of the under- The research precisely defined the parame-
Wing span 31 .3m carriage fairings and ihe pylon-mounted engine ters for the optimum number and type of
Wing area 130m' fairings with the wing was minimal and could noi engines for the subsequent design of a long-
Take-offweight 78,500k9 substantially increase the degree of shock-wave range jet bomber (given the specified perfor-
Landing weight 35,700k9 drag as the angle of attack increased: mance). The following conclusions were drawn:
Fuel ioad 36,000k9
Weight of engines 10,330k9
- engines in pylon-mounted nacelles greatly - the limits within which the specified performance
facilitated maintenance since the engines were could be achieved were significantly extended if
The '495'Jet Bomber Proiect easily accessible from the ground the overall power of the engines was increased
ln addition to the layouts described above, there
- locating the engines in a wing with an area of up - the limits for a twin-engine layout (AMRD-03)
was a version of the '494' with two AL-5 engines to 300m'?without any corresponding increase in were wider than for a four-engine layout (TR-3A)
installed in fairings beside the fuselage (the wing the wing root chord and related thicknesses in and wider for turbofan engines (TR-S) than for
area was to be 140m'). ln this variant the aircraft comparison with the'86' wing was inefficient pure turbojets (TR-3A)
had a highly stressed bicycle undercarriage with
- locating the engines in the fuselage was difficult - given the specified performance for a long-range
wing outrigger struts and auxiliary fuselage due to the inevitable heating of the fuselage bomber, the take-off weight should be within the
struts. Both TsAGI and the Tupolev OKB came structure and interference by exhaust gases with range of 60,000 to 1 00,000k9, the wing area 1 50
up with this method of positioning the engines. the bomb bay doors (if the engines were forward to 250m', and the total thrust available greater
ln OKB-156 this layout, as well as the project of the wing) or with the tailplane and glazing of than 1 2,000-1 4,000k9
for the 'BB' bomber, were proposed by A A the tail gun posltion (if the engines were
Tupolev. Wind-tunnel tests of a model with this mounted behind the wing) This work defined the design, and subsequent
configuration yielded very good aerodynamic development, of a long-range subsonic jet
As was evident from this analysis, the most effi-
results. The right choice of layout contributed bomber. These precepts were essentially vin-
cient layout for a medium-sized bomber (and
a lot to the future success of the Tu-1 6. dicated with the creation of the Tu-16 and other
that chosen by B M Kondorskiy's team) was the
The following conditions governed the prelim- aircraft of its class.
one in which the engines were mounted on
inary layouts developed from the '498' project: ln the summer of 1950 the results of the dif-
pylons and the main undercarriage legs
ferent versions of the future long-range bomber
- the crew, armament and equipment were to retracted into wing fairings. But TsAGI was, at
were discussed at a conference held at
be the same as for the '86' that time, very cautious about the idea of pylon-
OKB-156. The material on the variants of the
- the wing planlorm was to be similar to that of mounted engines and it was, therefore, not '494' project was presented by I B Babin and G
the'86' bomber widely used on Soviet aircraft at this time.
A Cheryomukhin, while A A Tupolev presented
- the stability coefficients derived from the'86' Engines mounted on pylons (or, to use the
his own project. After lengthy consideration
project (the rear fuselage length/wing span ratio Sovietterminology of thetime, on'knives') were
Chief Designer A N Tupolev decided to go
was taken from the '498' project but was close to used only on the Soviet-German '150' bomber
ahead with the bomber which received the in-
the ratio accepted for the '86') designed under the direction of Brunolf Baade,
house code 'aircraft BB'. The bomber was to
- and later on ihe lL-54, although pylon-mounted
the layout of the bomb bay was to be similar to the combine all the best features of the most
engines were also considered during design
rear bomb bay on the'85' bomber, which fixed the advanced versions of the '494' and A A
minimum diameter of the fuselage at 2.5m work on such aircraft as the M-4 and Tu-95.
Tupolev's project (the fuselage layout and the
- The performance data for seven differently
the maximum fuselage fineness ratio was to be wing with undercarriage fairings were to be
of the same order as for the '85'
powered variants of the bomber were exam-
based on the '494', while the location of the
- the maximum permitted tyre pressure was to ined within the confines of the 'wing area/take-
engines was to follow A A Tupolev's project).
be 9-10k9/cm' off weight' ratio (with a bomb load of 6,000k9):
Thus, in this first approximation, the Tu-16 took
- two AMRD-03 engines with and without shape - an aircraft whlch, for a number of
The basic data for the aircraft derived from pre- years, evoked the admiration of the world's avi-
liminary layouts for the '494' were as follows: - ation community.
four TR-3A engines with and without afterburning
- four TR-5 engines with and without afterburning
Wing area, m' 100 130 160 200 240 - four non-afterburning AMRD-03 engines The'88' Jet Bomber Prototype
Take-offweighi* 57-60 75-80 93-96 126-132 152-158 OKB-156's pursuit of the optimum version of
Fuel load* 24 36-39 48.s 71 85,6-87.5 The results of this analysis showed that if the the new long-range bomber with a higher per-
maximum range was to be achieved with the formance than that promised by the lL-54 was
* weight
expressed in tonnes
same expenditure of fuel, the twin-engined lay- welcomed not only by the Soviet Air Force but
out using two AMRD-O3 engines was prefer- by the Soviei government as well, and it was
The essential differences between the layouts able to the four-engined layout with TR-3A or decided to commission the new aircraft from
devolved mainly on the type of engines and TR-5 engines (on account of the reduced drag the Tupolev OKB. This decision followed the
their positioning, while, at the same time, the pattern of scientific and technological policy set
and weight of the power plants). The rest of the
configurations for the fuselage were basically performance data for a set range and take-off by the country's leadership in the poslwar
analogous to that of the '86'. run could be deduced, given the following min-
period when new types of weaponry, aircraft
An analysis of the layouts provided a number imum conditions: included, were to be created. For Tupolev it
of practical conclusions. As the dimensions of was an opportunity to redress his failure in the
the aircraft increased, the layout in which the - take-off weight, 60,000-70,000k9 undeclared contest with OKB-240 for the
engines were housed in the same fairing as the - wing area, 150-1 70m' USSR's first taciical jet bomber.
undercarriage became less workable due io - total take-off thrust, 14,000-16,000k9 On 1Oth June 1950 the Soviet Council of Min-
the greater cross-section and surface area of isters issued directive No2474-974, followed
the fairing and the loss of ihrust due to the Given a minimum thrust of 12,000-14,000k9, on 14th June by order No 444 from the Ministry
greater length of the jetpipe. the set range and take-off run could be of Aircraft lndustry (MAP - Ministerstvo aviat-
The layout in which the undercarriage and achieved by increasing the dimensions of the sionnoy promyshlennosti) in which A N
engines were housed in separate fairings offered aircraft: the take-off weight had to be 70,000- Tupolev's OKB-l56 was tasked with designing
less overall drag, primarily shock-wave drag. 80,000k9 and the wing area 190-210m'. and building a long-range jet bomber powered

Tupolev Tu-1 6
{ Fr*-r,1€fl drawing of the Tu-16 bearing this COB. CEXPEMHO
: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 Capro,rDT fi-16'
c 2-ur asrrnmusnr FM-5
': ::-::- '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 the first two examples of the AM-3 were to be icing system, and an oilifuel heat exchanger for
:*:-:: a.oui had been decided upon delivered to OKB-156: one for bench trials and cooling the oil, using the engine fuel. The AM-3
-" = ::-= -{ iask of determining the air the second for flight testing on the Tu-4LL (con- possessed a compressor with subsonic high-
- : : -:-: :rs and final aerodynamic and struction number 2301 13). They were to be fol- pressure stages which provided a pressure
-'--: :.:,: ,','as resolved by intense para- lowed by two more intended for the first '88' ratio of 6.2, and for the frrst time compressor
: - -::fr-r^ anc numerous experiments prototype which were scheduled for delivery in adjustment could be effected by air bleed
- : : - --:: ard full-size forms. lt became November 1951 - with a third example in Janu- valves after the first compressor stages. Pin-
: : - - -: ::..;rse of thls work that the total ary 1952 intended as a reserve. At this point the hole disc connection in the drumtype rotor
: :- -- = :,,, : AL-5 engines would be clearly bomber's future depended to a considerable facilitated blade alignment. ln OKB-300 the
. :: : -:-: :: a3hreve the specified perfor- degree on the successful conclusion of tests work on this engine was headed by Prokofiy F
- -. - ..:s ::erefore decided to use two on the world's most powerful turbojet engine. Zoobets.
:- :: :'3.uction designation AM-3) Design work on the AMRD-O3 had begun in The active design work on 'aircraft BB' got
, -=. : .:-s on with four AL-5 engines was 1949 in Aleksandr A Mikulin's OKB-300. ln 1952 under way immediately after a Soviet Council of
::::: :: : cack-up configuration, but in the engine successfully passed its State bench Ministers directive issued in June 1950. The
- - -- weight would be greater. tests and was placed in large-scale production Soviet Air Force issued a specific operational
- -,:-:.=::,:e-cff cecided in February 1951 that as the AM-3. lt was the first Soviet turbojet requirement for the new bomber on 1Oth July,
- - : ::-aentrate on theversion with two with a powerful thrust, and it remained for which was slightly amended on 11th Septem-
- -:s resigned by OKB-300, but the many years the standard power plant for large ber after the decision to use the AM-3 engine
-: =-::: ^:: finally resolved until several military and civil aircraft. The engine had an had been taken. The general design work was
' -: :::- ,',-er OKB-300 built and tested a eight-stage axial compressor, a cannular com- finished on 20th April 1951 with the completion
: 1-: = :':re AM-3. On 24th August 1951 bustion chamber, a two-stage turbine and a of the advanced development project (ADP)
: : '.:: : ,vas issued by the Soviet Coun-
. fixed-area nozzle. Swirl vanes were fitted at the and its submission to the Soviet Air Forces' Avi-
, - :::'s iollowed on 30th August by entry to the combustion chamber. The engine ation-Technical Committee, which signed its
- : : --= - '. : 332. according to which 'aircraft was also fitted with combustion tube cooling confirmation on 29th May. The draft project
: : -: :: o cr.rered by AM-3 engines with a using ribbed plates, a jet fuel starter for auto- with AM-03 engines was finally confirmed on
: :- ---s: cf B.700kg and a specific fuel matic self-contained starting, an adjustable de- Sth July.
" : -:- : ^ SFC) of .0kg/kgp'h. The static
- 1

. :' :- -: - rai rating was to be 7,000k9, and

- :: -:---: 6.400k9 (with a conesponding
: - :- - ::-l xgp h and 0.93k9/kgp h respec-
c0B. cEr{pEnn0
Canro,nbr ffv-td
eKopocnn0i prcxmrsitrru EtMEspAupoBEux c
2-ur AaurnrrnnMu nM-J
--. .'! weight of the AM-3 engine was
-:-='::-.. oe no morethan 3,100k9. shryr c2 xr tgBfiu! ll{6_195q (f,rulm t|truilF tq[uor&rq!0rhr0
-": -:,,, :rgine was to be submitted for 25t nm orcttEr! $adu nonrc@-
EtfiocitDqud{08 urrtu *nqrouu 250clq'
clrtror -
;- :- ::sts in December 1951. Hence, to tqtroB.iradq-550 c{FpQA0g h! nruxv

-: :..,elopment work, the MAP order

: ..-: :' :2^o 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 and
rrr!-s,a€ armament. Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tu-1 6 11
The following data refer to the draft project The defensive armament to be fitted was: between l Bth and 26th March when matters
bomber'88' with twin AM-03 engines (take-off relating to equipmeni and armament were
thrust B,700kg and nominal thrust 7,000k9): ForwardJiring 1 x Nudelman/Fikhter NR-23 finally agreed with the Air Force, and the earlier
(with 100 rounds) criticisms taken into account.
Fuselage length 33,6m Rear dorsal position 2 x NR-23 (with 250rpg) This prolonged period until agreement was
Wing span 33,0m Rear ventral position 2 x NR-23 (with 250rpg) reached resulted from the large number of orig-
Height from runway B.9m Tail gun position 2 x NR-23 (with 300rpg) inal technical features incorporated in 'aircraft
Wing sweep at quarter-chord J3 BB', which made it rather different from its pre-
Wing area (excluding centre section) 1 59m' decessors.
Wing area (including centre section) 164.59m' The crew positions were armour-protected The central podion of the airframe (compris-
Empty weight 32,760k9 from behind, from below and from the sides. ing the fuselage/wings/air intakes/engines/
Normal take-off weight 64,500k9 The overall weight of the armour on the aircraft undercarriage), which gave the aircraft its high
Payload (normal) 14,190k9 was to be 545k9. aerodynamic qualities, corresponded in fact to
Payload (overload) 31,740k9 An original form of undercarriage was the concept of 'area ruling'first introduced into
Maximum speed designed for the aircraft. The main undercar- the world aircraft design practice in 1954. On
* riage legs with four-wheel bogies (1 ,000 x the 'aircraft 88' bomber this was expressed in
at sea level 840km/h
at 5,000m 988km/h 300mm wheels with a tyre pressure of 8.5- the form of 'squeezing' the engine fairings in
at 10,000m 918km/h 9kg/cm') retracted into fairings on the wings, the area of the wing/fuselage joint, and the
Time to height (normal / max AUW) while the nose unit had twin wheels measuring slender wing fairings housing the main gear
to 5,000m 3.6 / 5,5 mins 900 x 275mm. Additional retractable outrigger units. These and other aerodynamic measures
to 10,000m 9,0 / 14,5 mins legs were fitted to the wingtips, each with a sin- subsequently contributed to the aircraft's
Service ceiling gle wheel measuring 265 x BOmm. speed of 1,040km/h (Mach 0.92) when the RD-
with normal weight 1 2,800m According to the ADP documents, the aircraft 3M engines were fitted.
with maximum weight 1 2,000m was to carry the following basic equipment: The engines were located in the wing roots
Range / endurance t aft of the second spar, with lateral air intakes
with a luel load ol 28,500k9 6,000km i 7,5 hours - electrical equipment: 4 x GSR-1800 generators, ahead of the wings. Air was fed to each engine
with a luel load ol 27,500k9 5,750km / 7,3 hours 2 x 1254-65 DC batteries along two ducts, one passing through the wing
wjth a luel load ol 25,500k9 5,300km i 6,7 hours - communications equipment: 2x lRSB-70 torsion box and the other passing beneath it.
with a luel load ol 21,500k9 4,380km / 5,5 hours command link radios, RSIU-3 communications This placement of the engines solved the prob-
Take-of{ runitake-olf distance radio, AVRA-45 emergency radio, SPU-10 lem of interference at the point where the wing
lu th maximum all-up weight 1,500 / 3,650m intercom met the fuselage - the most difficult junction in
Landrng run wrth a - navigation equipment: 2 x ARK-5 automatic aerodynamic terms. This particular problem
landing weight of 37,000k9 670-750m direction finders, Materik instrument landing was solved by introducing an 'active fillet': the
system, Meridian SHORAN, RV-2 and RV-10 jet exhaust sucked away the air flowing round
. lirnrted to an altitude of 3,600m by a dynamic pressure radio altimeters the wing and fuselage, at the same time direct-
limit of 3,400kg/m':,1rom 3,600m upwards - maximum - radar: Rubidiy-MM bomb-aiming radar with a ing the air flow in that zone. Those who took
permissible |\Iach 0.86; t with a take-off weight o1
FARM photographic adapter, Argon gun-laying part in the design work recalled that, at the out-
64,500k9, flying at 1 1 ,200-1 4,400m and a cruising speed radar in the tail, Bariy-M and Magniy-M2 IFF set, there was an inherent desire to minimise by
of 780-840km/h. transponders all means possible the cross-section at the
- photographic equipment for opportunity and point where the fuselage, fairing and wing met
The aircrew was to consist of six. The following planned reconnaissance: AFA-33i50, AFA-33/75 (for that reason the engines were located as
ordnance combinations could be carried: and AFA/33/1 00 day cameras or NAFA-3s night deeply as possible). Tupolev himself insistently
cameras for verlical photography; AFA-33/75 advocated and monitored this solution. He
Type/quantity Total weight and AFA-33i55 for oblique photography constantly inspected the proposed layout for
- oxygen equipment: 6xKP-24 breathing the bomber and demanded that the designers
Bombs apparatus, SMhU-50 Iiquid oxygen converter 'compress, compress, and compress again'.
24 x FAB-250 lt/-46 HE bombs 6,000k9 - autopilot: AP-5M When the model of the aircraft was tested in the
1B x FAB-500 M-46 9,000k9 TsAGI wind{unnel after allthese compressions
6 x FAB-1 500 [/-46 9,000k9 Work on the full-scale mock-up was begun in its specialists could not understand how the
2 x FAB-3000 M-46 6,000k9 June 1950 and completed on 20th April the fol- drag had been so drastically reduced, and it
1 x FAB-5000 M-46 5,000k9 lowing year. lts first inspection by Soviet Air took them a long time to report the conclusion
1x 0GAB-6000 6,000k9 Force representatives on 16th February of their findings to the OKB.
1 x FAB-9000 M-46 9,000k9 resulted in a list of 101 items to be corrected, As the bomber was designed to fly at high
and the second inspection on Bth March pro- subsonic speeds, its tail surfaces had a greater
duced a further 25. All these were taken into degree of sweepback than the wings. Thanks
1 2 x AMD-500 6,000k9
account during subsequent work on the air- to this, the phenomena associated with 'shock
4 x A[/D-1 000 4,000k9
craft. Officially the mock-up, together with the stall' affected the tail later than the wing. ln
4 x A[/D-M 4,800k9
ADP, was shown to Air Force representatives practical terms, this allowed the machine to
4 x Desna 3,000k9
on 20th March 1951 . The mock-up review com- retain its stability and handling at high speeds.
4 x Serpei 5,000k9
mission chaired by Soviet Air Force Comman- The bomber was further distinguished by a
4 x Lira 4,000k9
der-in-Chief S I Rudenko worked between 2nd number of other special features. A high wing
Torpedoes June and 7th July, approving the mock-up on aspect ratio (about 7) was chosen. The spar
3 x 45-36-AVA 3,000k9 the latter date. The installation of additional webs of the two spars and the upper and lower
3xTAV 3,800k9 equipment in the aircraft and work on the sec- wing panels between the spars formed its basic
3 x A-2 (RAT) 1,830k9 ond protoiype (called dooblyor, lit. 'under- structural element - the torsion box. The
study', in Soviei terminology of the time) led to strong, rigid box made the wing of the '88' quite
ln some cases a bomb load of up to 1 2,000k9 could be canied. another mock-up review commission which sat different from those of the long-range American

12 Tupolev Tu-16
::-.:rs. the B-47 and B-52. These machines and reduce the risk of shimmy oscillations. The crew have to take over control of the aircraft?
-:: ' wings, which facilitated the damp- method of retracting the main undercarrjage Particular attention had to be paid to the effect
-"- :'=xible
.,ertical gusts due to their considerable Iegs backwards into the wing fairings was later of the heat generated by the flash on the
::-:'-arion. The more rigid wing of 'aircraft BB' patented (somewhat later and completely inde- relatively weak duralumin alloy. (Later, those
:: :ss subject to deformation in flight due to pendently of the Tupolev OKB, this method was who took part in dropping nuclear test
. -::-ced stress. The wealth of operational used on the British Vickers Valiant B.Mk.2). A weapons from the Tu-16 affirmed that after-
::-:.ce later amassed with the Tu-16, the brake parachute was provided for emergency wards you couid push your finger through the
-'- l: arrliner in the USSR and the American landings. duralumin skin covering the aircraft's belly.)
-.': 707. Douglas DC-8 and Convair 880 ln the course of design work on the aircraft. These questions necessitated co-operation
:': -aro airliners proved that the more rigid a number of disagreements arose between with specialists lrom TsAGl, from other organi-
- ::^struction was more robust, especially leading specialists in OKB-156 and TsAGI sations and from the Soviet Air Force Research
, - :^: coint of view of structural fatigue. The about the use of irreversible power-assisted lnstitute named after Valeriy P Chkalov (GK Nll
-:- ::.s had to overcome many operational controls, and their use on large high-speed air- WS - Gosoodarstvennw krasnoznamyonnyy
-: :-s involving the wings of the B-47 and craft was insistently recommended by the spe- n aooch n o- i ssl ed ov ate I'skiy i n stitoot Voye n n o -
:: ':: rue cracks and, as a result, repeated ciailsts at TsAGl. But the poor reliability of the vozdooshnykh see/). An experimental base
= . : - ard reinforcement of the structure). first Soviet hydraulic actuators for aircraft made was built to simulate the complex effects pro-
- -::
^c the engines in the wing roots close them unsuitable for the new machine in the duced on the aircraft during a nuclear explo-
: '-: ',selage required
an unusual design opinion of the OKB's specialists (A N Tupolev's sion, and by the second half of the 1950s a
' -: .-: ne are intake ducts, which had spe- dictum that 'the best hydraulic actuator is the range of effective measures to protect the new
: -:-.s (at first made up from a number of one on the ground' is well-known). The design- nuclear weapons carriers in the air and on the
. -:: :-a iater comprising a single stamped ers had therefore to frnd some way of providing airfields where they were based had been
:- ':-'.^= main air flow fitted in the root area acceptable loading for the controls, which, on devised and introduced.
-: -'s: and second spars, with auxiliary air an aircraft of this size flying at high speed, had The structural design of the bomber, the
:.:: ,-ier the wing. This arrangement to have very small hinge moments. The difficult materials used, its equipment and systems as
: .: :^e necessary alrflow for the AM-3 problem was solved after numerous model and well as the manufacturing technology involved,
- - -: :: ,,,crk normally at the cost of a rela- full-size tests had been carried out in TsAGI's were chosen and developed with due regard to
: :-: rcrease in weight in the wing root wind tunnels. the actual capabilities of the Soviet aircraft
- : .- a '.- a wing centre section structure. As 'aircraft 88'was to become the first Soviet industry. This enabled an airborne strike sys-
| -
= =-:.' sJie of the bomber was its extensive nuclear weapons carrier to become opera- tem, which was to become one of the funda-
.. ,:: ::rb bay located behind the centre tional in large numbers (the ten examples built mental aspects of the Soviet deterrent, to be
,:-.:- ! -:af spar. Thanks to this the bomb of the Tu-4A could not provide a relrable 'deter- created within the shortest possible time.
:. - =_. :a.r.ed close to the centre of gravity rent shield'), the Tupolev OKB, as well as other The blueprints for the first prototype desig-
- : --: :a.. :self did not intrude into the wing's organisations working to provide the 'nuclear nated 'BB/1 ' (and referred to in internal corre-
- .:z- ^r siructure. The strength and rigidity shield', were faced with the task of ensuring the spondence as zakaz 881, 'order BB1') were
-- --:: a3e in the area of the bomb baywere delivery aircraft's safety once its nuclear prepared and delivered to the experimental
,':: :. ery strong longitudinal beams.
: . weapon had exploded. Such new phenomena construction facility at plant No156 between
--; :':,', ,',,as accommodated in two pres- as the spread of the powerful nuclear shock February 1951 and January 1952 - actually in
. ::: :=3 :ts with e.jector seats for all wave in a heterogeneous atmosphere, taking parallel with the machine's construction; work
. ---::'s The rear (tail) pressure cabin into account the effect of wind and its altitude went on in 'live update' mode, so to say, with
_:=: :,',: gunners - unlike earlier heavy variations, and the flash, either diffused or reciprocal onthe-spot correction of both the
-::": -:croving their combat co-ordina- refiected, as it passed through an atmosphere actual airframe and the drawings. Work on
. - .-: :::sling morale (the tail gunner was charged with various particles, had to be setting up the jigs began in April 1951, and
- - - l=- a :re out there'). explored. The parameters of the effect of a in May the front part of the fuselage was
-- : : : -:3 r- s defensive armament consisted nuclear explosion on the aircraft had to be already assembled. By the end of 1951 the first
"-'- ':-::3-controlled turrets with twin can- determined. This essentially involved issues of prototype was completed and a static test air-
- : '.;: 'onvardJiring cannon, four optical aerodynamics and structural strength. Would frame was built in parallel. On 26th December
-- -,- ::::: ard an automatic rear sight. This the shock wave destroy the bomber? Would A N Tupolev signed order No 27 for the
.:- :- -croved the bomber's defensive the aircraft be crushed by the pressure differ- machine's transfer to the flight test centre in
: : :: . ^ :.:l fiight, and was greatly superior ential following the shock wave? Would the Zhukovskiy.
'-: ::':-:: 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
On 25th January 1952 izdeliye '88/1 ' was Factory tests continued until 29th October
Type/quantity Total weight
transported to Zhukovskiy for further develop- 1952. ln all, 46 flights were made, the aircraft
ment work and f light tests, and on 30th January logging a total of 72 hours and 1 2 minutes. Dur-
the bomber was parked on the apron reserved 24 x SAB-100-55 flare bombs 2,400k9
ing the tests a top speed of 1,020km/h was
for Tupolev's machines. From then on the indi- 9,000k9
attained, which exceeded the specified figures.
1B x FAB-500 M-46 HE bombs
vidual testing and checking of every piece of 9,000k9
The bomber turned out to be overweight, with
1B x BRAB-500 armour-piercing
equipment began, the engines were ground- 9,000k9
a TOW of 77,350k9 and an empty weight of
6 x FAB-1 500 M-46
run, and new items of equipment delivered by 6,000k9
41 ,Os0kg (versus the estimated 64,000k9 and
6 x FAB-3000 M-46
various suppliers were installed. Final installa- 2 x BRAB-3000 6,000k9
35,750k9 respectively), which could not but
iion of all systems was completed three days 5,000k9
affect perJormance, particularly range and field
1 x FAB-5000
before the first flight - on 24th April. Even while 6,000k9
performance. A reduction in weight of at least
1 x BRAB-6000
all this work was under way, on 25th February 1 x FAB-9000 9,000k9
5-6 tons was required - and consider that the
1952, the prototype was submitted for factory 4,000k9
first prototype did not carry the full complement
flight testing. 6,000k9
of equipment.
12 x FAB-500 M-43

The 'aircraft 88' static test article (izdeliye 4 x FAB-1 000 M-43 4,000k9
Pedormance data derived from the factory
'88/0' or 'order 880') was also completed by the B,000kg
tests of the '88/1 ' are given below:
4 x FAB-2000 lV-43
end of 1951 and delivered to TsAGI on 26th *
December. Static tests at TsAGI were held lVaximum speed
12 x AMD-500 6,600k9 at sealevel 690km/h
between 1Sth January and 28th November
4 x AMD-I 000 4,500k9 at 5,000m 1,020km/h
1952. At the end of March that year OKB-156
4xAMD-2M&6xAMD-500 7,560k9 at 7,000m 1,002km/h
completed the structural strength calculations.
Bx AMD-2M 8,560k9 962km/h
The static tests and strength calculations pro- at 1 0,000m
8 x IGD-|\.4 B,560kg at 1 2,000m 930km/h
duced the following initial planning data:
6 x Serpei B,700kg Range t 6,050km

Fuselage length 33.5m 8 x Desna 6,000k9 Range f 6,050km

Wing span 33,0m B x Llra 7,600k9 Service ceiling over the targel 12,300m

Wing area 166.0m' 4x A-2 2,440k9 Time to height:

Maximum take-off weight 64,000k9 10 6,000m 6.4 mins

Normal all-up weight 48,000k9 to 10,000m 13,0 mins
6 x 45-36 AIVV 6,984k9
Landing weight ,) Take-off run/take-off distance
4 x RAT-52
with four AL-5 engines 51,200k9 with an AUW ol 76,000-77,000k9 1 ,980 / 3,750m

with two AM-3 engines 42,500k9 Landing run/landing distance

Estimated Mach number 0,86 It was planned to install the following experi- with a landing weight of 50,200k9 1 ,5'10 / 2,354m
l\/ax dynamic pressure ior 64,000-kg AUW mental, still not fully developed, defensive * at a weight of 57,500k9 (limited by dynamic pressure ol
with a G load of 6 3,450k9/m' armament on ' aircraft 88/1 ':
withaGloadol4.3 2,700kgln' 2,300k9/m'? up to 7,000m); t with a 77,128-kg TOW, a 3,000-

- an NU fixed forwardJiring gun mount with the

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
The flight crew for the first prototype was experimental Afanas'yev/Makarov TKB-495A
headed by test pilot N S Rybko and included (with a lengthened barrel, given the designation
co-pilot M L Mel'nikov, chief engineer for the AM-23 in service) with 100 rounds Building on the results of the factory tests it was
flight tests B N Grozdov and chief engineer - a DT-V7 dorsal turret with two TKB-495A cannon decided to submit the machine for State accep-
from OKB-156 I A Starkov. Chief designer and 250rpg tance trials, despite the fact that it was over-
Dmitriy S Markov was permanently in charge of - a DT-N7 ventral tunet with two TKB-495A cannon weight. The primary task was to evaluate the
all work on the bomber from the f irst prototypes and 350rpg bomber as a strike system while simultane-
to the last production aircraft. - a DK-7 tail turret with two TKB-495A cannon and ously trying to reduce its weight and achieve
The data below refer to the 'BB/1 ' bomber 500rpg the specified pedormance figures. The aircraft
with two AM-3 engines recorded at the start of was accepted for state trials by GK Nll WS on
the manufacturer's flight tests. This armament was not ready when factory 13th November 1952, the trials commencing
tests began, and the machine was tested in two days later at the Lll airfield in Zhukovskiy.
Fuselage length 34.6m unarmed configuration. They were interrupted on 30th March 1953 by a
Height on ground 9.85m The undercarriage layout of the PD project heavy landing after a routine test flight. Over a
Wing span 32.977n was revised: the first prototype lacked the comparatively short space of time the GK Nll
Wing area 164,59m' wingtip outrigger struts, the main units had WS test-pilots made 79 flights in the '88/1'
Wing sweep at quanerchord bogies f itted with 1 ,1 00 x 330mm KT-1 6 brake totalling 167 hours and 28 minutes.
0perating empty weight 41,050k9 wheels and the nose unit was fitted with The data below was derived from the state
Take-off weight: 900 x 275mm l<2-7012 non-braking wheels. trials:
normal 57,720k9 The basic equipment fit essentially corre-
maximum 77,350k9 sponded to that for the draft project, but as the 0perating empty weight 40,940k9

Payload Rubidiy-MM and Argon radars and the Merid- Take-off weight

normal 1 6,670k9 ian SHORAN were still not ready for flight test- normal 61,500k9

maximum 37,300k9 ing they were not fitted. lt was decided to install maximum 77,430k9

Fuel load them when they became available during the Payload

normal 12,470k9 course of test and development work. normal 20,560k9

maxlmum 32,1 00kg The '88/1 ' underwent its first taxying trials for maximum 36,490k9

an hour on 24th April 1952. A second taxying Fuel load

The crew consisted of six. The first prototype was test took place the next day, and on 27th April normal 1 6,070k9

designed to carry the following ordnance loads: the aircraft made its 12-minute maiden flight. maximum 32,000k9

14 Tupolev Tu'16
The '88' static test airframe undergoing
destructive testing at TSAGl. The blocks glued
to the wings' upper surface are designed to pop
qfl as the stress increases, indicating critical
d€{ormation. Tupolev JSC

'ra' num speed

:: sea level* 690km/h
,r:i soeed at full power
:: 7.500m 1,005km/h
:: i0,000m 962km/h
::12,000m 916km/h
.r:i sceed at nominal power
::7.500m 980km/h
:: 1 0,000m 941 km/h
:: 1 2.000m BBlkm/h
:::;e i endurance t
::10 000-13,100m 5,61Okm/7hrs10min
::::e ' endurance t
.: a constanl height of 1 0,000m 5,260km / 6 hrs 48 min - preparations for series production be launched and their bosses added a bit more for the same
at plant No 22 in Kazan' without waiting for the reason, and so on. As a result the take-off
::'0 000-12,900m 4,390km completion of the State trials weight exceeded the target figure by more than
:---- .^^^^
- d ruv+
- aircraft 'BB' be allocated the service designation 1 0 tons! Add to this the fact that, at the outset,

:: : constant height of 1 0,000m 5 hours 44 minutes Tu-1 6 the choice of powerplant was not yet finalised -
-:e'a: cnal range t - series production of theTu-16 commence in July aircraft had to be designed for either four AL-Ss
::'0 000-13,100m 1953 according to the following schedule: one or two AM-3s, - which also added unnecessary
,r :n 595 fuel reserves) 5,200km example in July, one in August, two in weight. As a consequence, there was more
,r:: :rdurance t September, three in October, three in November than enough excess weight that could be shed -
::'0,000m 8 hours 15 minutes and five in December and this was done on the second prototype of
--, :e ceiling 1 2,200-1 3,1 00m - before 1 st August 1 952 the first prototype was to the'88'.
--: :c height: perform an additional maximum-range test flight The second prototype, designated '88/2'
: -'l0m 5.7 mins - a new gun ranging radar capable of detectlng ('order BB2'), was built in accordance with the
'- ii00m 16,2 mins fighter-type targets at no less than 1 5-1 7km same Council of Ministers directive by and MAP
-i. :-cil run/take-off distance range be developed for the Tu-16 (this project order but without any set deadlines. Originally
,r: a 77,430-kg TOW 2,320/4,000m bore the codename Topaz) it was regarded merely as a 'duplicate' of the
-=-: :g run/landing dislance - MAP and the Tupolev OKB were to submit for first prototype; however, by the late summer of
a: a 50,200-kg landing weighl 1,540/2,480m State trials in September 1952 a Tu-1 6 with a '1951, when the '88/1 ' was almost completed, it
take-otf weight of 48,000-55,000k9, a bomb load became obvious that the machine was over-
' ., --^ a 57,500-kg AUW limited by a dynamic pressure of of 3,000-9,000k9, a technical range of 6,000- weight. Tupolev charged his OKB with the task
- i i!<g/rn'? up to 7,000m; t with a 77,430-kg TOW, a 3,000- 7,000km, a service ceiling of 13,000m, a take-ofi of reducing the aircraft's empty weight as much
. :,:mb load and a 32,000-kg luel load; with a 77,430-kg
: + run of 1,500-1 ,800m and a defensive armament as possible. This in itself involved redesigning
-l,i a 9,000-kg bomb load and a 26,000k9 luel load of seven 23mm cannon (in accordance with the much of the structure and OKB-156 organised
amendments to Council of Ministers directive a 'weight-trimming diet' in the course of which
spite of the reasonably good performance No 31 25-1 469 of 24th August 1 951 ) it was planned to 'slim down 'the machine.
';ures, thefirst prototypefailed its State accep- - production of theTu-4 at plant No22 be This work focused on three major areas.
trials for the following fundamental rea- terminated Firstly, the non-stressed structural elements
:lns: - series production of the AM-3 turbojet be had to be lightened. Secondly, it was neces-
organised at aero engine factory No 16 in sary to reduce the weight of the load-bearing
- :he mission equlpment did not function Kazan', with 70 engines to be supplied in 1953 elements as much as possible without com-
satisfactorily - state trials of the Tu-1 6 be concluded in promising their structural strength by reducing
- ihe lull complement of defensive armament December 1 953 the number of manufacturing joints and fasten-
was not fitted - service evaluation be carried out with the first 15 ers (for example, the multi-part duct frames
- the radar equipment was missing examples built at plant No 22 were replaced by integral units made of AK-8
aluminium alloy, and the D-16 duralumin used
As well as this, the aircraft had to be repaired. The'BB'gained its excess weight in the course in several parts of the aidrame was replaced by
fhe State commission decided to continue the of the first prototype's design and construction. V95 high-strength aluminium alloy). ln addition,
rials with the lightened second prototype - The primary reason for this had been the con- single-piece pressed profiles with variable
,zdeliye 88/2', built at an accelerated tempo at stant over-cautiousness of
the structural cross-sections were incorporated together with
experimental plant No 156. The repaired '88/1 ' strength department and the designers' con- large pressed parts, large sheets and the like.
,,ras subsequently used for testing and refining cern both for the aircraft and their own fates. (lt Thirdly, it was agreed with the Soviet Air
:he special equipment and the engines. should be borne in mind that the Tu-16 came Force that the flight manual would impose a
Series production of the'88'was decided on into being during the ultimate years of the Stalin speed limit up to an altitude of 6,250m, at which
:ven while the State trials were in progress. regime when any kind of mistake could result in altitude the aircraft would not normally be
3ouncil of Ministers directive No3193-1214 imprisonment - or worse.) Everyone wanted to involved in combat operations. The calculated
ri 10th July 1952 and MAP order No804 be on the safe side. Designers at the 'grass dynamic head pressure below this height was
:structed that: roots' level added an extra 10% - just in case, reduced lrom 2,7 00k91m'? to 2,200k9/m'?.

Tupolev Tu-16 15
The second prototype ( '88/2') at Zhukovskiy
during trials, with several Tu-4s in the
background. The old control tower visible
just aft of the tail in the three-quarters tront
view is still in existence, as are the huge
hangar 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 wings
the engine housings were slightly widened to
facilitate engine installation and maintenance
the airlair heat exchanger in the air conditioning
system (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
These measures reduced the aircraft's weight (70,000k9) and the maximum dynamic PO-4500 single-phase AC converters were
empty weight from 41 ,050k9 to 36,490k9. pressures at medium and low altitudes installed to power the radars
Design of the new lighter aircraft was com- (2,20Okglm'below 6,250m). The aircraft was to
pleted in November 1952. By this time the blue- be ready for renewed State acceptance trials in By March 1953 all the refinement work on the
prints for the 'heavy' version had already been June 1953. The production plant (plant No22) dooblyor was done, and on 14th March it was
supplied to plant No22 and preparations for was to provide TsAGI with a lightened version of cleared for flight tests. These were carried out
production were going full steam ahead. the production Tu-16 for renewed static tests. by a crew under test pilot N S Rybko, with co-
Replacing these blueprints with the ones for the The epic story of the bomber's lightening pro- pilot M L Mel'nikov (who had been co-pilot on
'lightened' version and resetting the jigs was gramme culminated in the following episode. the 'BB/1 ') and test engineer M M Yegorov who
fraught with a delay ln the start of series pro- Since the heads of OKB-156 had deviated from had done excellent investigative and develop-
duction, with predictable consequences for the generally accepted rules, a scapegoat had ment work on the Tu-4 and Tu-70 engines, as
those responsible. At this difficult moment to be found. The formal pretext was the second well as during the testing of the first Tupolev
Tupolev, supported by the MAP top executives, prototype's inadequate top speed during State jets.
took the courageous and vital decision to put trials (992kmih instead of the specified 1,000- fhe'8812' moved under its own power for
the lightened version of the Tu-16 into produc- 1,020km/h), which led the Minister of Aircraft first time on 28th March, and the 30-minute first
tion. At the same every measure was taken to lndustry to issue a formal rebuke to Dmitriy S flight followed on 6th April. The manufacturer's
shorten the delay until the first bombers had Markov who was in charge (which remained on tests were completed on 12th September. The
been produced. All blueprints and corrected his record for a long time until finally cancelled basic data relating to the factory tests appear
drawings had been supplied to plant No22 by - and which he rightly and perversely could take below:
the end of 1952, and the realistic deadline for pride in). He was 'rewarded' for the improved,
the first production Tu-16 delivery postponed and, as it turned out highly successful aircraft, Length overall 35.2m

from July to October 1953. by a formal note in his employment certificate Fuselage Iength 34.8m

Design work on the dooblyor began in and personal record. Height (theoretical) 1 0.355m

August 1951 , with construction of the aircraft at Apart from the revisions mentioned above, Height (practical) 9.85m

OKB-156's prototype factory taking place Ihe dooblyor was also refined in the course ol Wrng span 32,989m

simultaneously. The blueprints which included its design and construction. A number of criti- Wing area 164,65m'?

all the corrections aimed at lightening the air- cisms made during the first tests flights of the Wing aspect ratio 6.627

craft were prepared by the OKB between May 'BB/1 ' were taken into account, and some Wing taper 2.6416

and December 1952. The second prototype changes made when equipment not available Wing sweep at quader-chord JJ

('BB/2') was finished in early 1953 and trucked earlier was eventually fitted. ln particular: Landing gear track 9,775m

to the test and development centre at Landing gear wheelbase 10,913m

Zhukovskiy on 13th February. - the fuselage nose was lengthened by 0.2m to Empty weight 36,81 0kg

On 2nd March MAP issued order No272 increase crew comfod and accommodate All-up weight
'legalising' the lightened prototype. This docu- equipment more easily normal (in max-range llight) 52,500k9

ment contained provisos about the take-off - the fuel capacity was increased from 38,200 maximum 71 ,040k9

16 TupolevTu-16
r€d-on view of the second prototype, showing
'Fe 3rr intakes and the original design of the gear doors with one.piece quasi.triangular
i*Enents at the lront of the oleos. The hangar
ils,o",le beneath the starboard wingtip is the rival
Fr?sishchev OKB's experimental shop and
t!€rl test facility. Tupolev JSC

1 5,690k9

1 1 ,490k9

Combat radius 2,41 skm

Length overall 35.2m
1,002kmi h Take-off run t
Fuselage length 34.8m
Height of aircraft (theoretica 0.355m
wlth a 57,000-kg take-off weight 1 ,140-1 ,BBsm
905kmi h with a 71 ,560-kg take-off 1 ,900-3,165m
Height of a rcraft (practical) 9,85m
: rg v/ th 56,000-kg AUW Time from brake release to unstuck
Wing span 32,9Bgm
,::I 16.3m/sec
Wrng area 164.65m'
with a 57,000-kg take-0fi weight 28.7 secs

"--n 1 1,6m/sec
Wrng aspect ratio 6.627
with a 71,560-kg take-off weight 45,0 secs
-ilm 7.2mlsec
Wing taper 2.6416
Landing run $
:: :rde wilh 56,000-kg AUW oE) without brake parachute 1,655-2,785m
Wrng sweepback at qi.rarter-chord
-,:m 6.7 m ns
Landing gear track 9,775m
with brake parachute 1 ,050-2,1 B0m
::crn 13.8 mins
Landing gear wheelbase 10,913m
'- :: :: 'ng Over the target
Dry weight 36,600k9
with a 55,000k9 a1l-up weight; t with a 3,000-kg bomb
:;':': ccmb release 12,900m
Empty weight
load; t (take-off distance to 25m) at take-off power with
:-:'::1b release 13,200m
(wlth trapped fuel, starter fuel and oi 37.040k9
20' flap; S with a 44,000-kg landing weight and 35' f ap:
: '::'1 Cal range
A 1-up weight

-- a 71,040-kg AUW
6,01 5km The 'BB/2' prototype passed its trials with GK
normal for technical range 55,000k9
- a 72,000-kg TOW f 5,760km Nll WS purely in its bomber form. Tests of the
-...-:' run/take-ofl distance +
71 ,560k9
mine and torpedo armament were deferred to
maximum for exceptrona occasions 72,000k9
- a 56,200-kg TOW 1,220 12,215n jtted landrng weight be carried out on a specially modified produc-
Perm 48,000k9
- a 71,000-kg TOW 1,700m / n.a. tion machine which would serve as the 'stan-
Pay oad
'-: -j run/landing distance S
normal 1 7,960k9
dard' for the Tu-16 torpedo bomber/minelayer.
:-: :g weight 43,600k9 1 ,200 / 1,840m overload 34,520k9
During the trials the Tu-16 was loaded with the
:-: rg weight 47,000k9 1,360m
Fuel ioad
following types of bombs:
'-: -j r,in/ianding distance ti normal 1 3,660k9
:-: ng weight 48,470-kg 1,760-2,553m
overload 30,220k9
- Normal bomb load (3,000k9) 24 x FAB-100
- -- maximum for exceptronal occasjons 30,660k9
- Maximum bomb load (9 000k9) 24xFAB-250
a 3,000-kg bomb load (flying a hi-hl-hi' mission prof 1e)
or 18 x FAB-500
Crew weight 600k9
.-: a 30,030-kgfuel load; i (flying a'hi-hi-hi mission prof le)
or 6 x FAB-1500
Bomb load 3,000k9
=-: : 3.000-kg bomb load; + to 25m at take"off power and
Weight of ammunrtron for cannon 700k9 or 2 x FAB-3000
--' 'ap: S with brake parachute deployed and 35" flapt * or 1 x FAB-9000
lVax speed at take"off power
' , :-iut brake parachute with 35' flap
at sea level 675km/h
at 6,250m 992km/h During the course of the trials 12 TSOSAB-10
l: 16th September 1953 'aircraft BB/2' was at 10,000m 93Bkm/h coloured flare bombs were carried.
: :ared for renewed State trials and was [/ax speed at nominal power * After receiving approval Jrom the State com-
::cepted by GK Nll WS two days later. The tri- a1 sea level 675km/h mission 'aircraft 8B/2' was recommended for
=s. held between 26th September 1953 and al 6,250m 95Bkm/h series production and operational service with
' 3th April 1954, were heid almost exactly a year the Soviet Air Force.
at 1 0,000m 91 5km/h
aler the dooblyof s first flight. Sixty{ive test Maximum L4ach number 0.876 Subsequent production machines differed
',ghts with a total flying time of 154 hours and Unslick speed outwardly from the two prototypes ('BB/1 ' and
33 minutes were made in the course of the trials with a 57,000-kg take-off weight 250km/h 'BBi2') as follows, A different type of aerial was
3y a test crew captained by A K Starikov (who with a 71,560-kg take-off weight 280km/h installed atop the extreme nose (above the nav-
ater pedormed the greater part of the Tu-104 Landing speed igator's station forward of the flightdeck); two
arrliner's test programme) Apart from the tests with a 44,000-kg landing weight 223knlh 'towel rail' aerials were added on the upper
cf the aircraft itself, its systems underwent trials Service cei rng, at nom nal power fuselage sides aft of the flightdeck. The shape
3oncurrently - in particular, the AM-3 engines, w th 57,000-kg take-off weight 12,800m of the dorsal antenna ahead of the navigator/
:he experimental Rubidiy MM-2 bombing radar, w th 71 ,560-kg take-off weight 1 1,300m dorsal gunner's observation/sighiing blister
:he PS-4BM optical sighting stations and the Time to reach service cerling (serving the SPI-1 radio) was also different, and
experimental Argon gun ranging radar. with a 57,000-kg take-off weight 31 mins the pitot tubes were repositioned. Finally, the
Data derived from these trials of 'BB/2', which with a 71 ,560-kg take-off weight 38 mins small one-piece doors of quasi{riangular
served as the yardstick for the first production [/aximum technical range ( hi-hi-hi'): shape hinged at the front of the majn under-
Tu-16 bombers and were used as standards in wirh a 57.000-kg take'of{ we gntT 5,640km carriage oleos gave place to rectangular
their manuals, are given beiow: wrth a 71 ,560-kg take-otf we,gntt 5,760km clamshell doors.

Tupolev Tu-16 17
Chapter Two

Tu-1 6 Versions, Development

and Series Production
The Tu-16's production history and many years The Tu-16KS and its derivatives had one When the K-26 and K-26P ASMs became avail-
of operational service involved numerous and major drawback; they could not be used as able, these naval ASM carriers were refitted
varied versions (production series, prototypes, conventional bombers. At the same time, the as the Tu-16K-10-26, Tu-16K-10-26N and
experimental adaptations and testbeds). Some number of Tu-16KSs buili could not satisfy ihe Tu-16K-10-26P. The Tu-16K-10-268 version
of these were purpose-built, others were refits. existing demand for missile strike aircraft, and could also be used as a bomber, as the B suf-
The overall number of versions exceeded 80, bomber versions had to be converted. This led Iix ('for bombardirovshchi k) reveals.
and there were many projects which were to the advent of the Tu-16KSR-2A and When the Tu-16K-10 and Tu-16K-10D
never realised. Tu-16KSR-2-11 versions able to carry the K-16 became obsolescent, they were converted into
The first line of development concerned the or K-11 ASMs while retaining their capability as Tu-16RM-1 and Tu-16RM-2 maritime recon-
bomber version and its modifications. The bombers. naissance aircraft. The variant forfilming had its
Tu-16 carried a conventional bomb load; the With the arrival of the more sophisticated cannon armament replaced by special cin6
Tu-164 could carry nuclear weapons as well. K-26 ASM, earlier versions of the Tu-16 were cameras.
They were followed in production by the Tu-16 refitted to carry it: 'straight' Tu-16 bombers and The fourth line of development lay in spe-
(ZA) and the Tu-16 (ZA), both of which were Tu-16KSR-2A bomber/missile carriers were cialised reconnaissance and electronic coun-
equipped for wing{o-wing in-flight refuelling upgraded to Tu-16KSR-2-5 standard, the termeasures (ECM) versions. The Tu-16R
(lFR). After this, the IFR capability became an Tu-16KSR-2-11 was converted into the differed considerably from the original bomber,
almost standard feature and later models had Tu-16KSR-2-5-11, and the Tu-16KSR-2 and carrying dedicated equipment and an addi-
no special suffix to denote it. The prototype Tu-16K-11-16 into the Tu-16K-26. The all-pur- tional crew member as operator The Tu-16RM
Tu-168 was fitted with more powedul and fuel- pose Tu-16KSR-2-5 and Tu-16KSR-2-5-11 was an upgraded version, and the Tu-16RR
efficient engines. strike aircraft were produced in larger numbers radiation reconnaissance aircraft collected air
The Tu-1 6T torpedo-bomber (forpedonosets) than any other missile-toting version of the samples and analysed them for nuclear fallout,
was vifiually identical to the bomber version, Tu-1 6. chemical and bacteriological contamination.
but with a revised weapons bay. Later, the tor- The Tu-1 6K-26 generated the more advanced The Tu-16RE version carried an ECM set in
pedo-bombers were refitted as Tu-16PLO anti- Tu-16K-26P and Tu-16K-26-07 versions. A lim- addition to its normal reconnaissance equip-
submarine warfare aircratt (protivolodochnaya ited number of Tu-1 6K-26s and Tu- 1 6KSR-2-5s ment, while the Tu-16RTs provided mid-course
oborona - ASW) and as Tu-1 65 maritime search was equipped with the new Rubin-1M (Ruby, guidance for submarine-launched missiles.
and rescue aircraft (polskovo-spasahtel'nw * pronounced roobin) radar. Two examples of The first ECM versions were highly spe-
SAR, used attributively), the later carrying a the Tu-16KSR-2-5 with this radar were con- cialised machines. The Tu-16 Yolka (Spruce)
lifeboat. verted into Tu-16 Islklon-N (Cyclone N) was equipped for passive ECM and the
Some bombers were adapted to carry weather research aircraft. A small number of Tu- 1 6SPS for active ECM. The Tu-1 6 Yolka was
guided bombs - the UB-2F Chaika (Seagull) Tu-16KSR-2As was refitted as Tu-16KSR-|S later fitted with active ECM as well, and the
and Condor munitions - on external hardpoints. aircraft. Tu-16SPS had automated ASO-16 equipment
A projected version carried these weapons Some Tu-16KSR-2-5s, Tu-16K-11-16s and which led to the ECM versions being com-
internally. Tu-16K-26s were equipped to carry bombs; a bined. The resulting Tu-16E had a bigger crew
The refuelling tanker versions were similar few of these could take an increased bomb than the Tu-1 65PS.
to the bombers. The Tu-16(2) used the wing- load. New types of ASMs were tested, using the The most sophisticated ECM version was the
to-wing system, while the Tu-16N and Tu-16NN fu-16K-22 as a delivery vehicle. Tu-16P, on which the bomb bay was replaced
utilised the probe-and-drogue system. Addi- Versions adapted to carry target drones by a special compartment to house lhe Buket
tional fuel tanks were housed in the bomb bay, were similar to the ASM carriers. These versions (Bouquet) ECM suite. A small number of
and hose drum units were installed in the (the Tu-16KRM, Tu-16NKRM, Tu-16KRME and Tu-16Ps carried rockets to provide passive
starboard wing (in the case of the Tu-162) or Tu-16NM) were produced for the Air Defence ECM, and some had the Ficus ECM system
the bomb bay. When these were removed, Force (PVO - Protivovozdooshnaya oborona) with directional antennas. The last version car-
the aircraft could operate as conventional and were able to launch rockelpowered target ried the very powerful Cactus ECM set.
bombers. drones. The fifth line involved prototype and experi-
The second line of development lay in the The third line of development was the cre- mental machines, as well as testbeds. Some
adaptation of the Tu-16 as a missile carrier able ation of special naval versions - both ASM car- versions remained in prototype form for the fol-
to strike at both land and naval targets with riers and reconnaissance aircraft. These lowing three reasons. Firstly, the prototype was
equal success. The first of these was the differed significantly in configuration from the built to achieve some technical end, which
Tu-16KS armed with Kometa (Comet) air-to- Tu-16 and Tu-1 6KS with reconfigured weapons might prove successful but production status
surface missiles (ASMs) which was produced bays and a new YeN radar installed in the nose. would be frustrated by a variety of reasons -
in series. With the development of the more The first of these aircraft was the Tu-1 6K with political, economic and so on. Mention has
sophisticated K-16 and K-1 1 ASMs, the new engines and the K-10 ASM. lt was placed been made of the Tu-168 and Tu-16K proto-
Tu-16KS aircraft were upgraded to carry them, in production as the Tu-1 6K-1 0 but the produc- types. They were successful in term of their
the Tu-16KSR-2 being armed with the K-16 and tion version was powered by the same old specifications, but the late 1950s and early
the Tu-16K-11-16 with either the K-16 or the AM-3s. lt was followed by the upgraded 1960s saw a drastic cutback in aircraft devel-
K-11. Tu-16K-10D, Tu-16K-10N and Tu-16K-10P. 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 characteristic
nrsried-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 boattail
Br:g housing an active iammer ('29 Blue') and
n: rtheraircraft in bomber and EGM
=rigurations coded'30 Blue','26 Blue',
= 3;ue'.'24
Blue','22 Blue' and'34 Blue'. A
bomber/missile strike aircraft is visible
sFrEnd. along with two seemingly non-airworthy
-,-:5s banished to the grass verge to avoid
Eupying apron space. Note the open entry
'fi:r]es. Yefim Gordon archive

:-: --s. but in the prevailing climate of thought ?ii
-: --:: aircraft nor their intended engines went '-J'
-- - 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- Many Tu-16s ended their days as remote- Tu-16E ECM version. ln 1958 the factory initi-
:: ,',,:h RD-3MR engines equipped with thrust controiled target drones. A limited number ated series production of the Tu-104B airliner;
:.:'sers; the aircraft did not see series pro- were built in China which developed a few ver- a year later it launched production of the Tu-22
:_::3n. sions of its own. supersonic bomber - at which point Tu- 1 6 pro-
: :hird reason involved the prototype's cre- duction was temporarily suspended. ln 1957-
.- :- for a specific purpose only. Some Tu-16 59 several experimental and pre-production
:-: converted into airborne command posts The Tu-16 was built in quantity between 1953 examples of missile strike versions (earlier pro-
: , - ^g tests of a certain cruise missile, but were and late 1963. Early production examples duction machines refitted as Tu-16K-10s) were
-=::rfigured back into their original guise once lacked IFR equipment. Only eleven versions of produced for the Soviet Naval Air Arm (AVMF -
'-: iests were over. This, however, did not the Tu-16 (the Tu-16, Tu-164, Tu-16KS, Aviahtsiya voyenno-morskovo flota). ln 1959
: ays happen: the Tu-16 Tsiklon-Ns served in
.', Tu-16K-10, Tu-16T, Tu-16R with SRS-1 or plant No 1 completed the first production
'- -i form until the end of their service lives. SRS-3 communications intelligence (COMINT) Tu-16K-10; however, in 1961 , when the Kuiby-
=,:errmental versions were used for important sets, the Tu-16 Romb (Rhombus) with the shev factory switched to missile production,
:::3cts of technical research. They were usu- SRS-3 COMINT suite in the bomb bay, the series production of this version was reinstated
: ., custom-built at production factories but a Tu-16E and Tu-16 Yolka with the ASO-16 auto- at plant No 22, with the last example leaving the
':," were converted from 'second-hand' exam- matic chaff dispenser, the Tu-16P and the factory in December 1963.
: :s requisitioned from the Air Force. Some- Tu-165PS with SPS- 1 or SPS-2 active jammers) Until the late 1980s, Tu-l6s had the con-
--es the research involved another type of were built as such at three factories. The struction numbers stencilled on the forward
:'oraft. For example, tests of the 'jump strut' numerous other versions were refits of earlier fuselage and on the fin in large digits; later,
::',/eloped for the nose gear unit of Mya- production models. Thus the Tu-16R and however, they were not carried visibly for secu-
: shchev's M-50 bomber were carried out on a Tu-16P were built only at plant No 1 in Kuiby- rity reasons. The c/ns of Kazan'-built examples
---16. Testbeds were used for verifying and shev (now renamed back to Samara), although are deciphered as follows. For instance, a
:=veloping new systems, assemblies, equip- Kazan'-built examples of these versions (iden- Tu-1 6KS with the tactical code '25 Blue'was c/n
-:ent and engines, as well as for multifarious tifiable by their construction numbers) can be 6203125 - that is, year of manufacture 1956,
:<perimental and research purposes. For encountered. The exception is the single exam- plant No 22 (the first digit is omitted to confuse
-stance, the Tu-16 was used for testing the ple built with the Sl/lkat (Silicate) experimental would-be spies), batch 03 1 , the 25th aircraft in
fK-20 cannon-equipped tail turret, Ihe K-22 ECM system; while not officially listed as a pro- the batch. Batches 1 through 10 consisted of
-SM system, the PN navigation/attack radar duction machine, this aircraft was not a refit five aircraft each; the number was increased to
:reated forthe Tu-22K missile strike aircraft and (subsequently this Tu-16 had the Srlkat system ten per batch from Batch 1 1 onwards, then to
:re like, as well as for aerodynamic research. replaced by aFonar'(Lantern) ECM set. 20 from per batch from Batch 26 onwards and
'.lost prominently, the Tu-16LL was used as a Over its entire manufacturing period the finally to 30 per batch from Batch 31 onwards.
:eslbed for many Soviet jet engines. Tu-1 6 was built at three factories in 1 05 batches OKB-156, Lll or GK Nll WS documents
The sixth course of development concerned covering all versions (apart from the sometimes quote abbreviated c/ns. For exam-
:he adaptation of the Tu-1 6 for the Civil Air Fleet Tu-16K-10). Production rates varied over the ple, 'Tu- 1 6 No 1 01 ' was a reference to the air
IGVF - Grazhdahnskiy vozdooshnyy flot), or years when the Tu-16 was in production. Most craft whose c/n was 32001 01 (unfortunately the
Aeroflot (the sole Soviet airline). There were examples were built in 1955-1957; more than a abbreviated form cannot be used to recon-
only a few of these adaptations: for aerial pho- thousand were produced in the course of these struct the complete c/n unless you know when
iography, weather research and for carrying three years. and where the aircraft was built). Additionally,
the matrices of national newspapers. They Between 1953 and 1959 plant No22 named some Kazan'-built Tu-16s carried a four-digit
were also used to train GVF aircrews during after S P Gorbunov at Kazan'-Borisoglebskoye number on the tail below the c/n, the first digit
their conversion to the Soviet Union's first jet produced the following versions: the baseline likewise matching the year of production; for
airliner, the Tu-104. These adaptations were Tu-1 6 bomber, the Tu- 1 64 nuclear weapon car- instance, Tu-16KS'49 Red'(c/n 7203608) was
specially fitted out and lacked armament. rier, the Tu-16KS missile strike aircraft and the marked 7124,whilefu-16K-1 1-16'54 Red' (c/n

Tupolev Tu-1 6
The experimental Tu-16P 'Rezeda' ECM aircraft
('17 rcd' cln 52O2SO7) heads a long line of sister
ships at Vladimirovka AB, Akhtoobinsk,
including a missile strike aircraft coded'14 Red'
(c/n 6401208). All of these aircraft were
eventually converted into M-16 target drones by
GK Nll WS. Yefim Gordon

Five naval Tu-16s fly in echelon starboard

ilil'ijiflii*l formation over a Soviet Navy destroyer during
an exercise. Yefim Gordon archive

ri1l'ril"!t,,lqtl (c/n 4200305) was the Tu-16KS prototype;

Tu-16 No401 (cln 4200401) was used for
defensive armament trials, and Tu-16 No 105
(c/n 4200105) was used for testing the resis-
tance of long-range radio communications to
jamming. No302 (c/n 42OO3O2) was used for
testing the interlocking of the undercarriage
wheels with the wheel well doors; No501 (c/n
8204022) was marked 8191 . However, while year of manufacture 1963, the first aircraft in the 4200501 ) became the Tu-1 6T torpedo bomber
these numbers accrue continuously, they do batch; the first and the last digits do not signify prototype, No303 (c/n 4200303) was used for
not match the c/n sequence and the meaning anything at all and were chosen arbitrarily to testing the SNAB-3000 homing bomb (see
is unknown. complicate c/n deciphering for the outsider. Chapter3), No504 (c1n4200504) was used by
The Tu-16K-10 was built in 30 batches, each Again, unlike the prototypes, production OKB-'I56 for experimental work and No505
comprising five aircraft; oddly, these did not Tu- 16K-10s did not carry the cin visibly. (c/n 4200505) was supplied to Plant No 1 in the
continue the sequence of the previous Kazan'- Figures for Tu-16 production at plant No22 form of separate assemblies as a 'starter kit' to
built batches (Nos 1 through 42), being allo- are given in the table below: assist in launching production.
cated the numbers 51 through 80. With the On 1gth September 1953 the Soviet Council
exception of the two prototypes, Kazan'-built The first production examples from Plant No 22 of Ministers issued directive No 2460-1017
Tu-16K-10 missile carriers used a different con- became the prototypes for various versions or ordering a stepping up of Tu-1 6 production, fol-
struction number system - the one introduced were used as test-beds. Examples Nos 102 lowed by a Ministry of Aircraft lndustry order to
for the Tu-22. For instance, an example coded (c/n 32001 02) and 1 03 (c/n 42001 03) were con- the same effect on 25th September. Among
'15 Red'was c/n 1793014 - that is, batch 79, veried to Tu-164 prototypes; example No305 other things, Plant No 1 at Kuibyshev-
Bezymyanka was ordered to master the type.
Tu-16 Production at Plant No22 The first production bombers rolled off the
Kuibyshev assembly line in the summer oj
953 1 954 1955 1 956 1 957 1 958 1 959 1 960 1 961 1 962 1 963
1954. Production there was greatly assisted

19 19* 3*
both by the OKB and the by principal manufac-
Tu-1 6 1

45 189 103 57+46* 1Q* turer of the type, Plant No 22. Of lhe ten exam-
Tu-1 64
6 10 29 23+23' 16*
ples assembled in Kuibyshev in 1954, three
Tu-1 6KS

Tu"1 6K-1 0 2 3* 2* 30 were built from completely knocked-down

(CKD) kits supplied by Kazan'. Thus the first
Tu-1 6E
pre-production Tu-16 built by Plant No1 (c/n
t examples equipped with a wing{o-wing IFR system 1880001, the first example in Batch Zero) was
assembled entirely from the components of a
Kazan'-built aircraft that would have been c/n
&. -P 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 covering
all 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 to
20 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:

Tupolev Tu-1 6
-.::re machines produced in Kazan', some of Tu-15 Production at Plant No 1
-= "st Tu-16s produced at Plant No1 were
Version 954 956 957 1958 959 960
-::: as prototypes for later versions. The wing- 1 1 1 1 1

--.. :g IFR system was tested on Nos 001 (c/n Tu-1 6 10 BO 35 46*
:::101), 101 (c/n 1880101) and 301 (c/n Tu-1 6 SPS (with SPS-1) 22 20
:::3C1); Tu-16 No202 (c/n 1880202) was 28 70
Ty-16 SPS (with SPS-2)
-::: rn developing the RBP-6 Lyustra (Chan- Tu-16 Romb 5
:: :' radar and the SRS-3 Romb-1 (Rhom- Tu"16 Silikat (Fonar') 1

: -:-- r electronic intelligence (ELINT) system, 26r

Tu-16R (with SRS-1 and SRS-3)
- = Tu-1 6 No 302 (c/n 1 880302) served as the
Tu-16 Yolka (wlth AS0-16)
:':-:rype for the Tu-1 6R reconnaissance ver- 4* 34* 13*
Tu-1 6E
. :- initially the experimental Tu-16R-1 and 17*
-:- :ie experimental Tu-16R-2). Tu-1 6K-1 0

I ^ 2nd February 1955 the Council of Minis- *

equipped with wing-to wing IFR system. Three Kuibyshev-built examples were experimentally iitted with the wing{o-wing
:--. ssued directive No 163-97 followed on 1st system as early as in 1956
:-:r by MAP order No 1 27. These documents
.::-:C Plant No 64 at Voronezh-Pridacha was Kazan' factory. Apart from the Tu-]6 and batch 12 onwards) were built in Voronezh. The
:'::-ed to begin series production of the Tu-1 6T, Plant No 64 built a small batch of Tu-16 c/ns are deciphered as follows: for example,
---- -T torpedo-bomber for the Naval Air Arm, Yolka (wilh ASO-16 automatic systems). Pro- Tu-16L1 '41 Red' is c/n 6401410 - that is, year
:,-: :re process of establishing series produc- duction at Voronezh lasted until December of manufacture 1956, Plant No64 (again the
:- :nere likewise proceeded with the active 1957. Twentylwo batches (five aircraft each in first digit is omitted for security reasons), batch
:::::ance and support of OKB-156 and the the first 11 batches and ten aircraft each from 014. the tenth aircraft in the batch.

i€ 3lue' (cln7203415) was a Soviet Navy/

:?cific Fleet Tu-16KSR.2.5. lt is seen here at
r:zdvizhenka AB, its home base, in company
r':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 aircraft

r Kazan'-built batch 37, is pictured in the static
:ark at the grand airshow which took place at
Lcscow-Domodedovo airport on gth July 1967.
1e retracted radome ol the Kobal't-M 360' ",&&+ dtu -

-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


.{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 1 956 1957 Version Plant No22 Plant No 1 Plant No64 Total
Kazan Kuibyshev Voronezh
Tu-1 6 B 49 22*
Tu-1 6T 17 29 30* Tu-1 6 44 171 79 294

Tu-16 Yolka (with ASO-16) 10* Tu-1 6A 453 453

Tu-1 6KS 107 107

examples equrpped for wing-to-\,ving reluelling Tu-1 6K-1 0 157 59 216

Tu-1 6T 76 76
All three production factories were also
Tu-l6R (with SRS-1 and SRS-3) 70 70
involved in various refit and upgrades pro- 5 5
Tu-1 6 Rornb
grammes and in producing spares for the 5t B9
Tu-1 6E 3B
Soviet Air Force's operational and mainte- Tu-1 6 Yolka (with ASO-16) 42 52
nance units. An immense amount was done 42 42
Tu-16SPS (wlth SPS 1)
through the combined efforts of the Soviet Air 102 102
Tu-16SPS (wlth SPS-2)
Force and OKB-156 since, in addition to the 1 1
Tu-1 6SPS Sil kat/Fonar' 1 1

versions produced in series, there were several

dozen types of modifications carried out on Totals 543 165
Tu-16 machines while in service.
A total of 1,507 Tu-16s (excluding the two
Moscow-built prototypes and the static test air- Tu-16 Production Totals
frame) were built at the three production facto-
ries: 799 at Plant No22, 543 at Plant No 1 and Year Plant No 22 Plant No 1 Plant No 64 Total

165 at Plant No 64. The tables list the quantities Kazan Kuibyshev Voronezh

of the major versions and annual production of

i oEe 2 2
the Tu- 16 at the three factories.
954 70 10 BO
Some specialised versions were converted 1

955 200 102 25 327

by operational Soviet Air Force and Soviet Navy 1

956 tJz B9 7B 299

units. For example, production Tu-16K-10 mis- 1

957 170 206 62 438

sile carriers were converted into Tu-16RM 1

b4 137
reconnaissance versions by Naval Air Arm 1 958 73

959 2 30 32
units, Testbed examples were often converted 1

960 42 42
by the organisations wishing to use them, either 1

'1961 30 30
with the parlicipation of OKB-156 or under its
70 70
supervision. It would be impossible to give a 1 962
963 50 50
precise list of all the versions and modifications 1

since some aircraft were subject to more than 543 165 507
Totals I
one refit or upgrade. The following chapters,
drawing on existing documents and archive
material, contain more detailed information on A Tu-l6KSR-2-5 coded'18 Red'photographed from an escorting NATO fighter, Note the slits in the
the various versions of the Tu-16 as well as on a wing flaps to accommodate the lins of the KSR-s missiles and the camera window immediately aft
series of projects which never materialised. of the bomb bay. Yefim Gordon archive

s, .;$"
,o- ,' *. , ij


Tupolev Tu-1 6
Chapter Three

Production and Experimental Bombers

Special Purpose Versions
-.-1 5 Long-Range Bomber tion of an essentially new type of aircraft with- WS in September-October of that year. Check-
r rcraft '88', 'order 882', izdeliye N) out undue problems - although some of the out tests of the defensive armament system's
--: :'cduction Tu-16 bomber was based on older parts of the factory had to be rebuilt. The components (the PS-35 sighting station with the
'-. ::cond prototype (the 'BB/2'), and new launch of Tu-16 production was closely moni- VB-53 Argon radar) were carried out in July
- :--:rogical methods and structural materials tored byA N Tupolev, D S Markov and I F Nez- 1 954, using Tu-1 6 c/n 4200401 .
-:::: De used in its construction The integral val', head of OKB-156's Kazan' branch, and The Soviet Council of Ministers confirmed
, ::-'-ames, essential to reduce the machine's was based on the principles tried and tested the following performance data for the Tu-16:
.'--::;ral weight, were produced at Kamensk- with the Tu-4. While the two aircraft differed
-'. s.iry. using large hydraulic presses markedly, Ihere were structural similarities. Crew 6

:-:-:rrfrom the Soviet occupation zone in There were still many new problems to be lVax speed*
:=.-any in 1948 together with their German overcome. The swept-wing configuration with at 6,250m 992km/h
: ::'::rves. The three Schliemann presses (two the jet engines tucked into the fuselage and fed at 10,000m 93Bkm/h

:- :ai presses delivering pressures of 30,000 by ducts through the wing spars demanded a Service ceiling / time to reach it t 12,900m / 31 mins

.-: '5,000 tons and a horizontal press of special degree of care and accuracy from the lVaxlmum range { 5,760km

- I ions) had been assembled and brought

-: assembly workers. The use of numerous large Take-off run with a 71,560-kg TOW 1,900m;

:'---:c full power by 1952, butwere still almost assemblies and integral parts meant the need Landlng run with a
: : :Je to lack of any orders from the aircraft for meticulous attention in their manufacture and landing weight of 44,000k9 1 ,655k9
-:-::ry. Designers were still thinking in out- assembly. A pafiicular problem was caused by Bomb load
:=::: technological terms. The Tu-16 was, the delivery of imperfect wing sparframes. Close normal 3,000k9
-.':icre, the first Soviet aircraft built in series inspection was needed before these could be maximum 9,000k9
: -s= large pressed parls. Soon afterthis, sim- passed for assembly, and in some instances Cannon armament
:- spars were pressed at Kamensk-
,,,'lng frames with deep incisions had to be scrapped. 0ne fixed lorwardiiring 23mm cannon with 100 rounds
-': sKiy for the M-4 built at plant No23 in There were also many teething problems in fit- Dorsal turret with 2 x 23mm cannon (250rpg)
':s3cw; later orders included wings for the ting equipment, in pafiicular the defensive arma- Ventral turret with 2 x 23mm cannon
:-:tr surfaceto-air missile (SAM) system. By ment and the PRS-1 Argon gun laying radar. (normally 250rpg, but up to 350rpg possible)
-: :nd of the 1950s a hydraulic press of com- The first Kazan'-built production bomber (c/n Tail turret with 2 x 23mm cannon
:;':cle power, but now built in the USSR, was 3200101) was rolled out on 29th October 1953, (normally 350rpg, but 500rpg posslble)
-.:a,led at plant 1 in Kuibyshev and later used with production being extended to Kuibyshev in
-: lroduce parts for the R-7 intercontinental 1954 and to Voronezh the following year. The * in level flight at max power and a normal AUW of 55,000k9

:: slic missile (ICBM). These advances put empty weight of the production bomber varied t at nominal power and normal a1l-up weight
- = iSSR among the world's leading aero and from 37,200 to 37,520k9 (due to the variations t at optimum cruising speed with a 72,000-kg TOW (hi-hi-hi
.:a:e technologies. in the bomb racks to suit different bomb loads). mission profile) and a 3,000-kg bomb load
as already mentioned, plant No 22 in Kazan' The Tu-16 was officially authorised for Soviet Air
-:rame the pilot production factory for the Force service by Council of Ministers directive MAP ordered a production aircraft (cln 4201002)
---:6 in accordance with Council of Ministers No1034-43 of 28th May 1954 amd MAP order to be modified to increase its range. lts maxi-
: '3ctive No3193-1214 of 1Oth July 1952. lts No355 of 4th June, with the Ministry of Aircraft mum overload weight of 75,800k9 included
=,lerience in the large-scale production of lndustry stipulating that a production machine greater fuel tankage. Monitored trials by Nll WS
---4 bombers enabled it to implement produc- should be available for checkout trials by GK Nll of the aircraft's take-off and landing characteris-
tics and range with the overload weight given
above yielded the following results:

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

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

ol the baseline bomber version sits parked at
the lrkutsk Military Aviation Technical School
under dreary skies in the early spring. Note the
concrete blast dellector behind the aircraft.
Viktor Kudryavtsev archive

Tupolev Tu-16 23


"*t -:__. " ffiffiffi'"


,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 used eject, and was the first to do so. However, the '65 Red' (c/n 5201308), another example of the
as the 'standard-setter' for production exam- young co-pilot A I Kazakov stayed with the air- 'conventional'Tu-16 bomber (as distinct from
ples for 1955. craft and trjed to recover from the spin, but the nuclear-capable Tu.16A). The use of such
.1954 large tactical codes on the forward tuselage was
ln production was initiated at Plant No 1 could not do so due to the high control forces later discontinued. Note the early.model 'towel
at Kuibyshev. Tests of the first production as speed increased. A G load of 4.2 was rail'aerial on the forward fuselage, This aircraft
example (c/n 1880001) demonstrated that a reached and the destruction of the aircraft and was later transferred lo another unit and
large aircraft like the Tu-16 did require power- its crew seemed imminent. But fortune was on recoded'17 Red'. Yefim Gordon archive
assisted controls, and that, despite its weight Kazakov's side: the G force wrenched the
One more early-model Tu-16 bomber,'70 Red'
reduction, the Tu-16 was of robust construc- undercarriage legs loose, forcing them into (c/n 5201406), taxies out lor past a trio
tion. These conclusions resulted from a test extended position, and the extra drag slightly of Lisunov Li-2 transports. Yefim Gordon archive
flight on 28th September 1954 in which reduced the speed. By pulling the control col-
factory teslpilot Molchanov was instructed to umn back with a force of no less than 100k9
determine the machine's G limits. At an altitude Kazakov recovered from the spin just before From the second aircraft of the third Kuiby-
of 9,000m the machine was put into a dive, reaching the ground. The aircraft remained, to shev-built batch (c/n 1880302) onwards the
pulling of 3.2 Gs when recovering from the all intents and purposes, undamaged and a forward-hinged quasitriangular forward seg-
dive; however, the mission objective was to month later Kazakov was awarded the Hero of ments of the mainwheel well doors were
achieve a G load of 3.47. When the pilots the Soviet Union title. The strength of the air- replaced by twin lateral doors. This eliminated
reached a critical angle of attack, the aircraft craft evoked real interest, since it had signifi- vibration in the undercarriage fairing caused by
began to vibrate, then stalled and went into a cantly exceeded its G limit and still stayed in the stalled airflow from the door when the legs
tight spiral. The captain ordered the crew to one piece. were lowered.



;**#*trfl*-.. -,.

@ry.= 1

Tupolev Tu-1 6
-" , '::" , ;h oi Tu-16'32 Blue'(c/n 5201510)
rii;ir" -/: 1:-3ss a wintry airfield shows
.ilr':.:',:,- ':cs and the tail guns in the lully
r,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
::-: -^e Air Force and the Navy
. ." 2?: combers built at the three fac-
, :- =:-: ccurse of six years in roughly
- -::-s In the mid-1950s 14 Tu-16s
- 1

, - ::.1 rtc inllight refuelling tankers at

: i,:::^ iactories, and from 1957 90 R,- #*.$i
=: to receive
inf light refuelling .i -i
some Tu-16s were con-
-': :-::e-and-drogue tankers to refuel system to see service in large numbers. ln pro- ln squadron service the Tu-164 served both
.': -- :1u-22. A number were also con- duction it was referred to as 'order 191', and in as a nuclear weapon carrier and a conventional
--:.arious testbeds from 1954 operational service as 'aircraft BBA' or izdeliye bomber, and was equipped with an RBP-4
, :. :-e early 1980s only a small num- NA (for ahtomnyy - nuclear; in this case, radar, an OPB-1 1R or OPB-1 l RM optical
:: ::::3 comber versions of the Tu-16 nuclear-capable). Unlike the Tu- 1 6, the Tu-1 64 bombsight, a PKI reflector sight, PS-53VK,
: - sa1'rce. had a bomb bay with electrical heating, insula- PS-s381, PS-538P and PS-53K optical sighting
': -:^)/ years of service, the basic air- tion and a temperature-regulation system to stations, a PRS-1 gun ranging radar, a Sirena-
: : :: :noroved and modernised with enable it to carry nuclear weapons, and the air- 2 radar warning receiver, an SPS-SM active
=:: - :s take-off weight to 77,150k9 craft was provided with special protection from ECM system, an A-711 (with 4-713) LORAN
=-::. ,,,'eight of 37,200k9). The RD-3M the flash and shock wave of a nuclear explo- system, a Kl-12lGPK-52iDlK-46M flux-gate
:- r :^e,r advanced versions replaced sion. A special system for preparing and releas- compass, an Nl-508 navigational display, an
-: :'.i-3s. the mission equipment was ing the nuclear weapon was also fitted. RSBN-2S Svod (Dome) SHORAN, a DISS-1
:- :^: ai ASO-16 passive ECM system Production of the Tu-164 began in 1954 at Doppler speed and drift angle indicator, an
-: -'-.=t enemy radar. Many other sys- plant No 22. Before production ceased in 1958, ARK-S automatic direction finder, an RV-17M
:': : S3 Changed, 453 had been built, of which 59 were equipped high-altitude altimeter, an RV-2 low-altitude
- . --.=, version remained the basis for with an IFR receptacle under the pod wingtip in altimeter, an IAS-1M/AK-53M/ DAK-2 stellar-
::::-3^: versions of the Tu-16. From 1957-58 as the Tu-164 (ZA). This modification solar orientation device, an AP-5-2M or AP-6E
:-:s i yras supplied to China, where accounted for almost a third of all Tu- 1 6s built, autopilot, an SP-50 blind landing system, an
:-: :,ciion was later inaugurated. and was the largest version to see series pro- 4-326 formation flight system, RSIU-SB and
-: :' :-e Tu-16s remaining in service at duction. Like the Tu-16, the Tu-164 served in R-832M command radios, a 1-RSB-7OM com-
. - : :' :^: 1970s were equipped the latest approximately equal numbers with the DA and munications radio with a US-g receiver and a
: :-:-s in particular the Siren' (Lilac, the AVMF. During the 1960s, 155 Tu-164 R-851 crash (survival) radio. Three auxiliary
- --::: seeren'), SPS-4M and the like. bombers were converted to carry KSR-2 and power panels were provided in the navigator's,
=' .:-: and order 691'). (SPS = stah- KSR-1 1 ASMs. Several dozen Tu-164 were still second pilot's and navigator/radio operator's
, ::nekhovykh signahlov lit. 'interfer- in squadron service in the early 1980s. crew positions.
:-: 3i-.itter'.) Machines were modified Work on producing a version capable of The Tu-164 could carry the same bomb,
'-: lcgovitsa' [Cornea] flight system. delivering nuclear weapons began in mid- mine or torpedo weapon load as the Tu-16, but
-:-^ .les which began life as dedicated 1953. Two conventional Tu-16 bombers were was also able to carry the MVD6-16 (or MVD6-
in this form throughouttheir modified after the completion of design work in 16M), one of the five types of atom bomb at the
. :s
Several remained at the DA's 43rd November 1953 and submitted for testing by a disposal of the DA. The version of the Tu-164
- lcnversion Training Centre at Dyag- special organisation based at Bagherovo air- capable of carrying mines was produced as
-: as3 near Ryazan' and with the training field near Kerch on the Crimea Peninsula. This 'order 699'.
: -:- : :'ihe Chelyabinsk Military Navigator unit exercised overall responsibility for equip- Atomic bombs were dropped using an
-, =:- ping the Soviet Army with nuclear weapons OPB-I 1R or OPB-l 1PM bombsight linked to
-- : :::aafance of the new jet bomber in the under its head, General Chernorez, who was a the RBP-4 bomb-aiming radar and the AP-5-2M
: - =- - - l. did not go unnoticed in the West. highly informed specialist in the field of nuclear or AP-6E autopilot. As already mentioned, to
--l : :' Standards Co-ordinating Commit- and thermonuclear weaponry. The first two keep the delicate control system of the nuclear
-313 allocated it the reporting name Tu-16 bombers to be converted to'order 191' munition operatlonal the bomb bay tempera-
j , : --=' a^c subsequenlly Badger-A as the first standards were the second and third Kazan'- ture was maintained at +20"C, using four
: : :-:: :- model. built production examples (c/ns 3200102 and izdeliye 107 electric heaters, four air tempera-
42001 03). The adaptation work was completed ture regulators, four powered fans and a tem-
---' 6A Nuclear-Capable Bomber in 1953, and series production of the Tu-164 perature control system.
: .:raft '88A', 'order 19'l', izdeliye NAI began with cln 4200502 (although some The aircraft, crew and equipment were pro-
--: ---' 3A carrying a free{all atomic bomb sources indicate that the first production tected from the heat and flash of the nuclear
--: '.st Soviet nuclear weapons delivery Tu-164 was c/n 4201301). explosion in the following ways:

Tupolev Tu-16 25
by sealing or narrowing the gaps on the aircraft's When the Tu-164 entered service iis empty sides), it was likewise referred to by NATO as
exterior (hatch covers, doors and the like), using weight of 37,700k9 was 1 85kg greater than the lhe Badger-[.
overlapping tape basic bomber's. ln the late 1950s all opera- The data below refer to the Tu-1 64 with two
by fitting blinds to glazed areas which could be tional Tu-164 bombers were modified to RD-3M-500 engines (each providing a maxi-
closed or put in place before the bomb was ensure greater resistance to the nuclear flash, mum thrust of 9,500k9) in the closing days ol
dropped with those areas of the metal skinning mosi its service career:
by encasing some equipment and wiring in exposed to the flash made as resistant as pos-
insulating materials sible. From 1962 onwards the aircraft was fitted Empty weight 39,720k9

by applying special white reflective paint to the with the ASO-16 chaff dispenser. Since the All-up weight

underside of the aircraft (this was known as the Tu-164 had no external differences from the normal 75,800k9
'atomic' colour scheme) baseline bomber (apart from the white under- maximum 79,000k9
lVlaximum bomb load 9,000k9
lVaximum speed
up to 500m 670km/h
at 6,250m B90km/h

at 10,000m 960km/h
Maximum permissible lVlach number 0,9
Service ceiling with a TOW of 62,000k9 1 2,800m
Service range f 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'l
Experience 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 bombs
weighing between 5 and 500k9 was produced
as 'order 684/1 '. The internal bomb load
remained at 9 tons, but the number of exter
.E nally 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'l
ln 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, pronouncec
rezedah) jammer in a characteristic conical fair-
ing with flattened sides. This ECM fairing, which
was also used on some other Tupolev types
was known as UKhO (oonifitseerovanng
khvostovoy 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 career

the construction number was no longer carried
visibly, as demonstrated by'26 Blue'. Note that
all trim tabs are painted red.

A Tu-l6 seen from the dorsal observation/

sighting blister of a sister ship flying in echelon
starboard formation,

Tu-l6A'34 Red' (c/n 72035141 was not a

specialised ECM variant; it was equipped for ECM
protection during group operations, featuring
SPS-100 Fezeda and SPS-S jammers in a UKhO
tail tairing supplanting the tail turret. lt is seen
here during trials. This variety of the 'A was
known as'ordet 2624'. All Yefim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-1 6

- 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 was
un-::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

ffi.{lrFff'Wiwr *,"
---aA N uclear-Capable Bomber

ir 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- I

. - :-: enhanced protection for the crew.

Above:Tu-l6A c/n 4200503 was modified in 1956 as the sole Tu-16V capable ol carrying a hydrogen
bomb. Yefim Gordon archive
---1 5A Nuclear-Capable Bomber
:-.craft '88A', 'order 260') Below: Close.up of the heavy curtain erected around the Tu.16V's bomb bay when the hydrogen
--:-. olher versions with slightly revised bomb was being loaded. This was probably meant to conceal the bomb lrom those who
.:-:-13nt and armament were a number of were not supposed to see it, but may be a heat insulation curtain as well. Yelim Gordon archive
--":- 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.

Tupolev Tu-l 6
Tu-1 6B Experimental Long-Range Bomber differed only in the shape of the engine fairings. Long-Range Bomber with TR-3F Engines
On 28th March 1956 the Council of Ministers Unlike the AM-3, which was started by a so- (aircraft'90/88' project)
issued directive No 424-261 followed by MAOP called turbostarter (a small gas turbine engine During the design work on the '88', project
order No194 on 6th April. These documents spinning up the main engine's spool), the work on an alternative configuration continued
ordered OKB-156 to develop a version of the M-16-15 (RD16-15) had electric starting; hence as an insurance policy in case of problems with
Tu-16 powered by Zoobets M16-15 (RD16-15) additional DC batteries had to be carried and AM-3 engine. This project, the '90/88', had four
turbojets developed by the Rybinsk Engine the engine fairings lacked the usual exhaust 5,000-kg thrust Lyul'ka TR-3F engines, but with
Design Bureau (RKBM), each with a take-off ports for the turbostarters. The Tu-168 was to a different configuration. Two engines were
thrust of 11,000k9. These were to give the air- offer vastly improved performance - especially located in the same positions as on the 'BB',
craft a range ot7,200km and a maximum speed range - thanks to its more powerful and fuel- while the other two were carried under the
of 1,03Q-1,050km/h. Two examples were to be efficient engines and greater fuel load. lt was wings between the flaps and ailerons. Two ver-
ready for State acceptance trials in the first planned to use it as an intercontinental bomber sions were prepared: one had main gear fair-
quarter of 1 957. 28th May 1 956 saw the appear- but, although the basic objectives were ings like the 'BB' while on the second version
ance of MAP order No 295 instructing OKB-156 achieved and the engines proved reliable and the main gear units retracted into fairings
to supply the necessary conversion documen- troublejree, the cutbacks in the Sovlet bomber blended smoothly with the wing engine
tation to plant No 22 in Kazan' in preparation for force meant that neither the Tu-168 nor its nacelles. ln both cases the main undercarriage
series production before 1st July. Plant No22 engines entered series production. leg had twin wheels, and single-wheel outrig-
itself was ordered to produce two prototypes Along with the Tu-168 project, OKB-156 gers were fitted to the wingtips (in a similar way
with the new engines, one to be ready for man- worked on a number of others relating to the to that originally proposed for the 'BB'). The
ufacturer's tests in October and the second in bomber's engines; these included an attempt fuselage was virtually identical to the Tu-16.
November 1956, while OKB-16 was to supply to equip the RD-3M with thrust reversers (on Further development was terminated once the
four RD16-15 engines with a life of 200 hours in both the Tu-16 and the Tu-104) and the use of success of the Tu-1 6 was assured.
September. Two versions of the resulting jet-assisted take-off (JATO) boosters to reduce
Tu-168 were proposed, one with additional the take-off run when the bomber was fully Long-Range Bomber with TV-12
external fuel tanks and one without. The esti- loaded. None of these were adopted for pro- Turboprop Engines (aircraft'90' proiect)
mated data for the two versions are given duction machines. Later projects in 1965 ln 1954 OKB-156 engineer Sergey M Yeger
below: included replacing the RD-3M-500 with more proposed a version of the Tu-l6 powered by
fuel-efficient Kuznetsov NK-8-2 or NK-B-4 tur- two 12,000-ehp Kuznetsov TV-12 turboprops
no external with external bofan engines, but these were frustrated by (known as the NK-12 in production form and
fuel tanks luel tanks problems with modifying the engine housings. already fitted to the four-engined Tu-95
ln the mid-1970s the issue of installing bomber). The turboprop derivative of the Tu-1 6
1 65rn' I 84m' Solov'yov D-30P turbofans was raised but was designated 'aircraft 90'. Yeger's project
38,1 00kg 39,440k9 received no backing from the Soviet Air Force called for the wing of the '88'to be modified, the
Take-oi lrergh'i 76 B00kg 90,200k9 Command. air intakes eliminated, and the new engines
llaximum range 9,780km The 'inflexible' character of the bomber's mounted on the wings between the flaps and
0perat onal range engine installations had been a matter of con- ailerons in fairings which also housed the main
no in{light refuell ng 7,200-7,500km B,950km cern for the aircraft's designers for some time. undercarriage legs. The more fuel-efficlent tur-
1 in-flight refuelling 1 0,000-1 0,500km 1 1,900km As early as the beginning of the 1950s an alter- boprop engines were seen as a means of
2 in-flight refuellings 1 3,200krn 1 5,200km native configuration Jor the bomber included extending the bomber's range, but the associ-
new wings featuring leading-edge root exten- ated redesign of the wings, undercarriage and
sions (LERXes) with 45" leading-edge sweep at fuselage looked set to be protracted; also, the
The Tu-168 prototype was modified from a pro- the roots; the leading edges incorporated slot Soviet Air Force was satisfied with the perfor-
duction machine (c/n 6203330) built in Kazan', air intakes similar to those of the British V- mance of the Tu-16 with AM-3 engines. The
Testing at Lll got under way in March 1957, bombers. The engine fairings were to be under project was therefore shelved, although a ver-
initially with M-16-15 and then with RD16-15 the wing trailing edge close to the fuselage. sion of the Tu-104 airliner fitted with either NK-B
engines which had a longer service life. The Such a layout would have provided far more turbofans or Kuznetsov TV-2F turboprops was
second prototype Tu-168 underwent trials at options on the type of engines fitted as the later considered as project '1 1B'.
GK Nll WS until 1961. Outwardly the Tu-168 bomber was upgraded.
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 afterburning
turbojets designed by OKB-36 were to be fitted,
together with a new wing swept back 45' at
quarter-chord. These measures were designed
to 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 enlarged
engine nacelles housing vertically paired
t turboiets are clearly visible. Tupolev JSC

28 Tupolev Tu-1 6
-.--i 3€ Black'(c/n 4200303) was modilied for
Err€ the SNAB-3000 Krab homing bomb; two
*rcr lombs were carried on special underwing
sms-s- -,colev JSC

-.vE-Bange Supersonic Bomber with VD-7

u' 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 paired
i-:2 y a /a English Electric Lightning and release. Guidance was effected through the speeds. ln August 1955 experimental Condor
' :--:: in enlarged fairings. Further investiga- sight by a juxtaposition of the bomb's image bombs were again tested from the Tu-4 using
: - :' ihe project, however, indicated that the with an indicator registering the angles of diver- TV guidance and with the navigator using a con-
-:: - -e would not be able to reach supersonic gence derived from calculating the bomb's tra- trol joystick. Not only could this system be used
:-: ;n its existing configuration even with jectory and generated by a special computer. in less favourable weather conditions, it also
:: :'le engine power. However, the '103' did lnJlight control by the bombardier was obviated the need for the bomber to fly over the
.;- : :s the precursor to the work on the '105' effected by a 4A-Nl data link system transmit- target. Tests using an adapted Tu-16 (as 'order
supersonic bomber which ultimately ting on three wavebands simultaneously to 251' began in March 1956, but although suc-
' -:':=d as the Tu-22 (in 1954 the possibility of frustrate jamming. The bomb's receiver passed cessful the system was not accepted lor opera-
-: -: :re Tu-16 for a first essay in this direction the signals to the AP-59 autopilot which acti- tional service. The large bomb carried externally
:: =iamined). vated the bomb's guidance mechanism and increased drag to the detriment of both speed
made the necessary corrections to keep the and range. Work on guided bombs carried
irperiments with Guided Bombs bomb level. The bomber's height dictated the externally was therefore terminated.
-r€ Tu-16 Chaika required speeds for releasing the bomb, and
:: =: development work on guided bombs, these varied between 550km/h at 5,000m and Tu-16 with the UBV-5 Guided Bomb
-- over 900km/h above 6,500m. As the bomb's Work on a more sophisticated guided bomb,
= ,i based on World WarTwo German types
- - : - as the Fritz X, for tactical and long-range speed was lower than that of the bomber, the the 5,150-kg UBV-S fitted with a 4,200-kg war-
: :-3ers began in the early 1950s. The Tu-16 pilot was obliged to pull his machine up and head, began in the summer of 1956. The bomb
:s seen as a suitable delivery vehicle for the lose speed so that both the bomb and its target was to have a high-explosive or an armour-
'::-kg UB-s Condor (aka UB-5000F; UB = remained visible. The UB-2F (UB-2000F) had a piercing warhead with either TV guidance (like
: -'atlyayemaya bomba - guided bomb) with high-explosive warhead (F = foogahsnaya - the Condor) or an autonomous heat-seeking
:200-kg warhead or the 2,24j-kg UB-2F high-explosive), but the use of the U8-20008 system (like the Chaika-2). Two variants were
-:-2000F) Chaika (Seagull) with a 1,795-kg armour-piercing version (B = broneboynaya - designed: one to be carried internally and the
:--:ad. Radio control or television guidance armour-piercing) was also envisaged. other semi-recessed (the latter was rejected by
:::ms were used. The Tu-16 equipped to During the latter years of the 1950s the the Soviet Air Force). The drawback to all the
: =--.' a guided bomb was fitted with a KRU-UB improved Chaika-2 (with infra-red homing) and Soviet guided bombs was that the carrier air-
:: l control
transmitter, ihe operator eitherfol- the Chaika-3 (with passive radar homing for use craft was obliged to release the bomb only a few
: the marker flare attached
', 19 the course of against enemy radar and ECM sites) were kilometres from the target, increasing the risk of
': :^e bomb through an OPB-2UP optical sight developed, although only Ihe 4A-22 Chaika was enemy interdiction. This problem could be over
:- ;sing images transmitted to a monitor actually tested and accepted for operational come by the use of solidJuel rocket motors on
. :':en from a TV camera (a 'bomb's eye view') use in December 1955. The UB-2F was the first the bombs, so that they resembled ASMs, but
-: -rake course corrections through the linked Soviei guided bomb. Tests results showed that the advantages of guided bombs in their sim-
-:: o control system. The latter method proved only two or three such bombs were needed to plicity and low production costs as compared
- :'e accurate and less reliant on weather con- hit a target measuring 30 x 70m as against 168 with ASMs began to wane. The emphasis
:: rns. The bombs were carried under the FAB-1 500 conventional freejall bombs. shifted to air-launched cruise missiles able to
-, -:lage or under the wings. strike enemy warships while the launch aircraft
- small number of Tu-16 bombers were Tu-16 Condor Guided Bomb Carrier was still some distance away. This brought an
::-ipped with the 4A-22 Chaika system which ('order 251') end to work on the 7,500-kg UPB rocket-pow-
::rirolled the UB-2F guided bomb against Preliminary tests of the UB-s (UB-5000F) Con- ered guided bomb which was to be released at
:-allbut impodant targets such as railway dor guided bomb were carried out using the a range of 300-350km from its target.
:-oges, storage depots and administrative Tu-4. The Condor was intended for use against
:, idings from high altitude. Two UB-2F bombs large surface ships and was essentially an Tu-16 with the SNAB-3000 Krab
',:re carried under the wings on special pylons enlarged Chaika with a high-explosive war- Homing Bomb
--i the bomber was fitted with an electric sys- head. Two versions were developed, one using On 14th April 1957 the Council of Ministers
::r for arming and guiding the bomb. The sys- line-of-sight radio command guidance (like the passed directive No1175-440 giving guide-
:::r could only be used in good visibility Chaika) and the other TV guidance. The radio lines for guided weapons development untilthe
::nditions when both the bomb and the target command system was used during tests with mid-l950s. Among other things, the All-Union
::uld be observed through the special the Tu-4, but its accuracy proved significantly State Research lnstitute No642 (GSNll-642)
l"B-2UP periscopic synchronised sight used poorer than the Chaika's since the heavier Con- was tasked with developing a 3,000-kg homing
'::dropping free{all and guided bombs in levei dor reached speeds in the order of Mach 1.1 bomb designated SNAB-3000 (samon-
' Eht. This automatically signalled proximity to and in{light control proved more difficult. These avodyashchayasya aviabomba - homing
:cmb release, the time when the bomb bay problems were eventually overcome and satjs- bomb) which was also known under the code-
:gors were to be opened, and the moment of factory results obtained through he range of name Krab (Crab).

Tupolev Tu-16 29
Development of the SNAB-3000 proceeded service introduction of the 3M revealed serious Some aircratt were equipped with ECM gear,
under the leadership of D V Svecharnik. The problems with the VD-7 which were not including the Buket jammer. Externally the
design was strongly infiuenced by the German resolved until series production of the Tu-16 Tu-16T differed little from the bomber version
Fritz X, featuring the same four large fins in a was drawing to a close. except in the weapons bay doors.
squashed-X arrangement and cruciform tailf ins lntended for low- and high-altitude torpedo
within a rhomboid-shaped rudder arrange- Tu-16 with Unguided Rocket Defensive attack and mine-laying, the Tu-16T had a top
ment. Unlike the German prototype, however, Armament ('otder 227') speed of 992km/h at 6,250m wlth an all-up
the SNAB-3000 had swept wings. The bomb Trials of this tail defence system using TRS weight of 55,000k9. With the same flying
featured an AP-55 autopilot for initial guidance unguided rockets housed in a launcher that weight, the top speed was 938km/h at
and an infra-red seeker head for terminal guid- could be elevated vertically through 30" were '10,000m. lts range at optimum altitude
with a
ance. The lR seeker was activated by a timer, scheduled for the autumn of 1956. The system take-off weight of 72.000k9 and a 3,000k9 load
allowing the bomb to zero in on large targets was developed in accordance with Council of torpedoes or mines was 5.760km. lts service
with a high heat signature, such as factories. of Ministers order No 2253-1069 of 3rd Novem- ceiling with the engines at nominal power was
The warhead weighed 1,285k9. ber 1954 and MAP order No693 of 13th 12,800m, an aititude the Tu-16T reached in 31
Trials began in 1951 , initially using Tu-4 car- November. A production Tu-16 was made minutes. lts take-off run with a 71 ,560-kg AUW
rier aircraft and 'dumb' versions of the bomb available for trials but development was appar- was 1,900m. and the landing run with a44,000-
without the homing system. The fully equipped ently then terminated. kg landing weight was 1.655m. Like the
'smart' version entered test at the GK Nll ws bomber version of the Tu-1 6. the Tu-16T was
facility in Akhtoobinsk in late 1952. The bomb Tu-16T Torpedo.Bomber known to NATO as the Badger-A. By the early
showed promising results at first, accurately ('order 21O', izdeliye NTI 1960s the more formidable anti-aircraft
homing in on pans with burning kerosene used The use of the Tu-16 as a torpedo-bomber by defences employed by naval vessels made the
as simulated targets; out of the 1 2 inert and live the Naval Air Arm (AVMF) was an inherent fac- use of torpedo-bombers impractical, and the
bombs dropped in 1953-54, eight fell within tor in the aircraft's design, and all Tu-16 Tu-1 6T f leet was converted into Tu- 1 6PLO ASW
47m of the target. bombers were to be capable of carrying mines aircraft or Tu-16S SAR aircraft. Six examples of
However, the piston-engined Tu-4 was slow or torpedoes. CofM instruction No7501 to this the Tu-16T were supplied to Egypt.
and hopelessly outdated, so the decision was effect was issued on 12th July 1954, followed
taken to use the state-of-the-art Tu-16 as the by MAP order No 432 on 1Sth July. The relevant Tu-16 Mine-Layer
delivery vehicle. Hence a Kazan'-bullt Tu-16 manufacturer's tests and staie trials were made Some versions of the Tu-16, particularly the
serialled '36 Black' (c/n 4200303) was fitted in 1954 on Kazan'-built Tu-l6 c/n 4200501 Tu-16P (SPS). the Tu-16 Yolka and the Tu-16R
with special pylons under the wings for carry- which thus became the torpedo-bomber proto- (these versions are described later) in AVMF
ing two SNAB-3000 bombs. lt was then that type produced as 'order 210' and designated service were refitted as mine-layers in accor-
problems began; the jet-powered Tu-16 turned Tu-16T or izdeliye NT in naval service. The air- dance with 'order 699'with the option of revert-
out to be too fast for the bomb which became craft was ordered into production by CofM ing to the bomber version if required. Some
unstable when dropped at high speeds, the directive No 163-97 of 2nd February 1955 and Tu-16s in service with the Red Banner Baltic
accuracy dropping dramatically. The strong MAP order No 127 of 1st March. Fleet Air Arm were thus modified in the early
drag generated by the bombs reduced the air- Possible weapons loads to be carried con- '1970s. Superfluous equipment was removed
craft's range to 3,620km with two SNAB-3000s sisted of four RAT-52 torpedoes, or six 45-52 W and cassette{ype racks for mines fitted in the
and 4,500km with one bomb versus 5,430km torpedoes, or eightAMD-500M (orAPM), tGDM weapons bay.
with a 9,000-kg freeJall bomb carried internally, or AGDM-2M Lira (Lyre, pronounced /eera)
To top it all, the reliability of the guidance sys- mines. Tu-16PLO (Tu-16PL)
tem was all too low; of the 32 test missions Production of the Tu-16T (based on the pro- Anti-Submarine Warfare Aircraft
flown by Tu-16 '36 Black', 16 ended in failure totype) began at plant No 64 in 1955, with orders Stafting in 1962, a number of Tu-16T torpedo-
due to various malfunctions of the bombs. for 25 new-build examples in that year and for bombers were convefted for anti-submarine
Hence on 26th August 1956 the Council of Min- the conversion of 20 bombers. Production con- warfare (ASW) as the Tu-16PLO (or Tu-16P1).
isters' Scientific & Technical Board convened tinued until 1957, by which time 76 examples of These were intended for ASW operations using
to assess the results of the trials, cancelling all the Tu-16T had been built at Voronezh, apart the Baku sonobuoy system within a range of
further work on the SNAB-3000. from the conversion of Tu- 1 6 bombers operated 1,00Okm (without in{light refuelling) from their
by the AVMF. The Tu-16T was refitted to carry bases. The system comprised the SPARU-SS
Tu-1 6V High-Altitude Bomber mines and torpedoes with a revised electric airborne automatic detection set (samolyot-
Work on the Tu-16V high-altitude bomber weapons release system and additional control noye preeyomnoye avtomaticheskoye
project (V = vysotnyy - high-altitude) with two panels in the navigator's station. Special secur- rahdioustroysfvo), sonobuoys (each one trans-
VD-7 engines was carried out by OKB-156 in ing chains were also fitted to prevent the torpedo mitting on its own frequency), an ANP-18 auto-
the late 1950s. The VD-7 engine rated at being inadvertently released. matic navigation instrument, a RPB-4 radar
1 1,000k9 thrust for take-off and 8,600k9 thrust Production examples of the Tu-16T had bombsight and a PP-1 panoramic receiver/djs-
at nominal power was more fuel-efficient, revised weapons bays to carry two RAT-52 play. The sonobuoys were dropped in a pattern
lighter and smaller than the RD-3M and it was rocket-powered torpedoes, six high-altitude around the submarine's presumed location,
estimated that the bomber's range could be 45-54W or low-altitude 45-56NT torpedoes. picked up its sound and relayed information
increased by about 15% with the same fuel two BV-20 depth charges, 12 AMD-4-500 bot- on its position and characteristics to the aircraft.
load. The project drawings show revised tom mines or four AMD-4-1000 mines. Rocket- A decision as to an attack method could then
engine fairings to accommodate extra batter- propelled RM-1 and RM-2 surface mines, UDM be taken, or the information received relayed t
ies, as the VD-7 used electrical starting. Project universal bottom mines, IVDM-3, MDM-4 and o other aircraft. The search version carried
work took place at the same time as V M Mya- MDM-S bottom mines, the Serpei and Lira either 36 RGB-NM or 24 RGB-N buoys, the
sishchev's OKB-23 was working on the 3M anchored mines, AMD-2M, IGD-M and Desna search/attack version either 18 buoys and
four-engined bomber powered by the same mines, UPAMB-100/80 practice mines and 45- two AT-1 torpedoes or 12 buoys and one
engines, but was terminated with the cutbacks 36MAV torpedoes could also be carried. The nuclear depth charge, and the attack version
in the bomber development programmes at the overallweapons load was 8.7 tons. The Tu-167 was armed with either two AT-1 torpedoes, 25
end of the 1960s. Another factor was that the could also carry a full 9,000k9 bomb load. PLAB-S0 depth charges or six RM-1 rocket-

30 Tupolev Tu-16
*TE *i I from the late 1980s Soviet motion
ilt=:r-e i-he Incident in Grid Square 36-80 r -':i
rritl'Ers :he Tu.165 SAR aircraft taking off with ,i
llrllf i.eglat liteboat suspended under the
rureiD.aE!€. -:oolev JSC still from the same movie showing

riE ii,s6oat falling away from the Tu-l6S as
lir 3rr!€t Navy tries to extend aid to a US Navy
ura-arine in distress. Shortly after the lifeboat
s,e$'€d down the submarine's computer went
nrmna/ty haywire, executing an uncommanded
ms6rl€ launch against a group of Soviet
srNr!.ri os, whereupon the sub was scutiled by
ir =€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- a^i 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 the
i : . =: Navy designated Tu-1 65 (spasahtel'nyy - the loss of the Soviet nuclear-powered subma- Tu-142, the Tu-1 6SP had far shorter range and
:>:-e. used attributively) began in 1955 pur- rine SNS Komsomolets (K-278); had they been endurance; the service introduction of the ded-
.,=-: io Council of Ministers directive No 1952- active, the number of survivors might well have icated long-range Tu-142 meant that the
--- cf 26th December. The aircraft carried a been much higher. Tu-16SP was phased out.
=gaht (Frigate) radio-controlled powered
-:: rat designed by I F Nezval' at the Tomilino Tu-16SP ASW Search Version Tu-16G (Tu.104G) Special Delivery Aircraft
:-:-oh of OKB-156. After locating the area The Tu-16SP carried a powerful search radar Before the Tu-104 entered service, three pro-
-:'e a vessel or aircraft was in distress by (similar to that used on the Tu-1 42 ASW aircraft) duction Tu-16 bombers were transferred to
-::.s of its onboard radar and spotting sur- in its weapons bay able to detect submarines Aeroflot and used to deliver the matrices of
. :'s (or cosmonauts, in the event the re-entry either on the surface or at periscope depth. national newspapers to regional capitals where
-::rle splashed down instead of landing in ASW torpedoes or sonobuoys couid also be the papers would be printed. (lf the papers
:: sieppes of Kazakhstan, as was customary) carried. A number of these conversions was were delivered to the eastern regions of the
:: l-u-l65 paradropped its lifeboat and started carried out in the 1970s. Compared to the Soviet Union all the way from Moscow, they
':: Iatter's engine by radio. The boat was
:-::!'ed towards the rescue area by TV control.
--: system was successfully tested by the
l'-: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
* lffifu1plJ*"' ':

CCCP-'15411 (that is, SSSR-L5411, c/n 1881301),

one of several Tu.16s temporarily demilitarised
for carrying newspaper matrices and for crew
tlaining duties during the Tu-104 airliner,s
service introduction period. Visible beyond
is Tu.1 6A'72 Red' (c/n 4200401).
':iim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-16 31
Close-up of the starboard wingtip ol a
decommissioned Tu-15(Z) tanker ('30 Black', c/n
1882801), showing the conduit through which
the fuel transler hose exits and the horizontal
'winglet'whose purpose is to minimise the
destabilizing eflect of the wingtip vortex on the
hose; red and white stripes are applied to this
'winglet'to make it more conspicuous' The slits
immediately ahead are the de-icing system hot
air outlet, Yefim Gordon archive

Tu.16(2)'26 Red'(c/n 1882108) comes in to land,

showing the hose conduit protruding aft trom
the starboard wingtip. Yefim Gordon archive

Another Tu-16(Z) passing overhead shows

that it has the famous'winglets'on both wings,
suggesting that it has a reluelling receptacle
as 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 weapons
bay 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 bombers
was similarly used under the designation lL-20,
starting in 1954.

Tu-104G Civil Aircrew Conversion Trainer

A small number of lL-28 and Tu-16 bombers
with all armament and military equipment
removed were transferred to Aeroflot to facilitate
aircrew 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 Aeroflot
titles and winged logo on the forward fuselage
sides. Only one aircraft regisiered CCCP-I5415
(that is, SSSR-L5415; c/n 1881301) has been
positively 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 scheduled
f 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 Soviet
Air 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 that
r :: 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 Ministersissued 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
^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,
-^e 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 a
: :: 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 under
l,: 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
.---' 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-
--= '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- 'I
, .', :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'.
Tupolev Tu-1 6 33
Another refuelling scene. This view illustrates
the shape which the refuelling hose assumes
after the receiver aircraft makes contact and
moves 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 by
Tu-16As (no doubt having been converted from
one ol those) and has been retrofitted with a
iammer covering the forward hemisphere for
sell-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 the
engines had a bigger power reserve and pilot-
ing was easier.
ln the autumn of 1955 IFR experiments were
made in accordance with the aforementioned
Council of Ministers directive No 1013-438 and
MAP order No354, involving two specially
Durlng the IFR operation the receiver aircraft reconnaissance and patrol flights both by the modified MiG-19s (manufacturer's designation
assumed echelon starboard formation with the DA and the AVMF. One refuelling increased the izdeliye SM-10) using the wingtip-to-wingtip
tanker, which then deployed a hose attached to Tu-16's range by almost 2,000km, and a sec- method. The fighters serialled 316 Red' (c/n
a cable from its starboard wing. The receiver ond refuelling raised this to almost 3,500km 59210316) and'415 Red'(c/n 59210415) were
aircraft placed its port wing on the hose and (with 5% fuel reserves). modified by OKB-155 (the Mikoyan design
manoeuvred so that the hose slid along the The wingtipto-wingtip refuelling method bureau) and the Tu-1 6 tanker (c/n 1 880301 ) by
wing until it was stopped by a fitting under the had its advantages in that the aircraft being OKB-156 and OKB-918. although the tanker's
wingtip. The hose was then rewound by the refuelled was not in the tanker's wake vortex, a refuelling equipment remained virtually
cable until its end was automatically connected tight formation between the two aircraft was not unchanged, apart from the replacement of the
to the receiver aircraft's refuelling receptacle. essential, and the components of the system normal BBmm hose by one 50mm in diameter.
When this had been done, the two aircraft took were straightforward and uncomplicated. A Komissarov was the chief engineer for the
up close formation with the tanker slightly There was, however, the risk of damage to the project. with lgor' Shelest as Lll's project test
ahead. Decoupling of the two aircraft could be wing skin if the initlal contact was made clum- pilot. Some 3,000 litres of fuel could be trans-
effected at any stage in the process, either by sily, and no option for a second coupling if the ferred at a rate of 1,000 litres per minute - hall
the operator or automatically if the two aircraft drogue parachute stabilising the hose was lost. the usual transfer rate for Tu-16 to Tu-16 refu-
drew apart. Supervision and control of the fuel An added bonus was that the Tu-1 6 was able elling. During one test the MiG-19 was twice
transfer was the responsibility of the co-pilot in to operate from shorter and less heavily con- refuelled in the air and able to remain airborne
each aircraft while the aircraft's captain creted runways by taking off with a substan- for six hours. Refuelling could be carried out
manoeuvred and then maintained formation. tially lower fuel load (that is, a take-off weight of several times during a mission - both in the
ln its final form, the tanker had a normal take- 60,000k9) and then taking on fuel in the air daytime, unless impeded by cloud, or by night
off weight of 75,800k9 and carried a maximum immediately afterwards. The range in this case using fixed and manually trained lights.
24,500k9 of transferable fuel. IFR was prac- could be slightly greater than if the aircraft had The vortex generated by the Tu-16 wingtip
ticed intensively over the sea during training, taken off with a full fuel load. Experience also caused problems, but after initial factory tests

n o**ru*liri,rr,,ri+ ;r .,i;;ildiomu,,MfufrtJF'g"&' *,,*, ".'detu

!}W rdh {


Tupolev Tu-1 6
-lio the SM-10 and its Tu-16 tanker were years of practice by the Soviet Air Force the transferable fuel load of 19,500 litres. Refuelling
=-::C over to Lll for further testing with a drawbacks of this combination became appar- took place at a speed of 630kmih and at an alti-
-.:C hose. This had a more reliable attach- ent, as did the advantages of using a lighter tude of 6,000m. With improved drogue-and-
-:-: rnechanism, was less prone to folding, tanker able to use the same or similar airfields hose equipment the Tu-16N served on into the
:: .ss affected by the tanker's wingtip vortex as the Tu-22. Being based solely at Engels-2 AB 1980s. The Tu-16N was yet again referred to by
: ,',as shorter. Factory tests of the new fuel in southern central Russia, the 3MS-2s had to fly NATO as lhe Badger-A.
::: croved favourable, but the verdict of the across almost the whole extent of European
: -:- :rg State trials was that the method was Russia to reach the rendezvous zone, whereas Experimental Tu-1 6 (Tu-1 5D?)
: : nicult. Work on IFR for fighters was there- the Tu-16 tanker could operate from neighbour- Probe-and-Drogue Refuelling Receiver
': shelved, resuming only in the 1970s. ing airfields in the Ukraine or Belorussia. ln the late 1950s a single Tu-16 was converted
::cording to OKB-156, 1 14 Tu-16 bombers The refuelling system in use on the 3MS-2 was into a receiver aircraft using the probe-and-
=': converted to serve as wingtipto-wingtip adapted and developed on suitably modified drogue IFR technique. Although the trials were
.--3rs (other sources give a total of 46), and Tu-16 c/n 1882401. From 1963 several Tu-16 successful the method was not adopted. This
:-' aircraft - over a third of all the Tu-16 built - were convefted as 'order 358' at Kazan and des- modified Tu-16 was used, however, in devel-
, :': equipped as receivers. Tanker aircraft gnated the Tu- 1 6N or izde I iye N N in service. The
i oping IFR equipment for the Tu-95KD and
::- c be reconfigured as bombers by field tanker could revert to bomber configuration if Tu-22KD long-range ASM carriers. The desig-
-i ltenance units by removing the extra fuel necessary. ln '1966 a Tu-16N (c/n 1882314) nation Tu-16D has been reported for this ver-
:- -,s from the aircraft's weapons bay, although underwent refuelling trials with aTu-22RD (cln sion, although it was not officially used during
:::: the OPB-1 1R sight was also removed, 3083012) reconnaissance aircraft as the the trlals.
-:<ing reversion impossible. The pedormance receiver aircraft. The success of these prompted
:- 'eceiver aircraft was not affected by the addi- the conversion of 23 Tu-16 bombers to Tu-1 6N Tu-16NN Tanker
::i of the IFR receptacle to its wing. standard at the Kazan'factory between 1968 Several standard Tu-l6(2) tankers were con-
and 1970. With a single top-up from the Tu-16N verted to probe-and-drogue tankers in 1969
Tu-16N ln-Flight Refuelling Tanker Ihefu-22 had an increased range ot7,200km, along the lines of the bombers converted to
'order 358', rzdefiye NN) increasing to B,000km with two top-ups. Using Tu-16N standard. Although designated
.', :n the introduction of the supersonic IFR once on the outbound leg and again on the that
Tu-1 6NN, they were so similar to the Tu-1 6N
---22RD, Iu-22KD, fu-22PD and Tu-22UD return flight further extended the range to they were referred to as the Tu-16N in Soviet Air
::mbers equipped with refuelling probes (D = 8,500km. The Tu-1 6N itself had a normal take-ofi Force service. ln all, some 20 Tu-16(Z)s were
J a h I' n iy - long-ran ge) nto Lon g-Ran ge Aviation
i weight of 76,670k9, but could carry a maximum conveded into Tu-1 6NN tankers.
=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-
: 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 the

tanker variants, and these aircraft were
convened from whatever was available - except
missile strike versions. This example (c/n
1 882302) coded '41 Red' on the nose gear doors

and '41 Blue'on the tail (!) used to be a Tu-l5R

coded'35 Blue'. Yefim Gordon archive

'45 Blue' (c/n 1882503), another Tu-l6NN.

Yefim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-16
Chapter Four

The Missile Garriers

Tu-16KS as an air-to-surface missile (the KS-1), as a sile). ln 1 950 the ASM was ready for testing as
('order 187', izdeliye NKSI shipto-ship missile (the KSS) and as a surface- the diminutive izdeliye K proof-otconcept air-
Work on the first Soviet long-range air-to-sur- to surface missile (the KS-7). All three missiles craft (a manned version of the actual KS-1 with
face missile system began in 1947, involving were very similar and varied only in their provi- a bicycle landing gear and a cockpit instead of
development of the missile by a section of sion for their specific funciion. the explosive charge), and in 1 952 the f irst true
Mikoyan's OKB-155 (Mlkhail I Gurevich was ln June 1948 the Soviet Council of Ministers missiles were tested and placed in series pro-
project chief, wlth Aleksandr Ya Bereznyak in issued a directive on the creation ollhe Kometa duction. The production KS-1 was 8.29m long.
charge ofthe actual design). The carrier aircraft (Comet) weapons system, which involved It featured wings swept back 55', with a span of

was developed byTupolev's OKB-156 (underA adapting Tu-4 bombers to enable them to 4J72m. The missile was powered by a RD-
V Nadashkevich) and the missile's control and launch air-to-surface missiles against surface 500K turbojet engine with fuel load of 330 litres
guidance system by SKB-1 (under Sergey L vessels over an operational range of up to and carried a 1 ,000-kg warhead over a range of
Beria, son of the infamous KGB chief Lavrentiy 2,000km from their bases. The missile to be 70-90km at a maximum speed of 1,050-
P Beria); the latter design bureau bore overall used was the KS-1 'winged missile' (izdeliye E) 1,100km/h.
responsibility for the system as a whole. which resembled a scaled-down MiG-15 fighter The guidance system devised by SKB-1 for
The missile was developed in three versions: (KS stood for krylahtyy snaryad winged mis- 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 seen
during trials, Note the one-piece forward-hinged
main gear door segments and the hemispherical
bottom of the Kobal't-1N radar's radome which
was taken straight from the Tu-4KS. Tupolev JSC

Another view of the Tu-16KS prototype. The

KS-1 was quile a large weapon, Note how the
command link antenna at the top of the fin is
positioned above the wing upper surface when
the missile is on the wing. Tupolev JSC

lli I'iil'liri

Tupolev Tu-1 6
:- 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

-:: :.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 gear
3leos 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 retaining
3rms folded away to reduce drag after the missile had been launched. The
suspension lock is located closer to the rear pair, Note that the pylon has
3 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'contained
pressure 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

revolving antenna in a semi-retractable missiles and an all-up weight of 54,000k9 was

missile carrier configuration. This involved
radome), the addition of missile pylons under 1,240m - the same as for the bomber version
adaptation of the bomb bay to house the
the wings (which had to be reinforced accord- ln fact, handling during take-off or landing was
WSO's pressurised workstation and elements
ingly) and modifications to the fuel system barely affected at all, although the landing
of the K-1M Kobal't-1M radar (including a
enabling the KS-1 misslles to be fuelled from speed with a landing weight of 47,000k9 (with
the carrier. Manufacturer's tests were held both missiles) was 10-1skm/h greater.
Below left: Close-up of the nose ol Tu-l6KS '25
- between August and November 1954 with test Tesied at altitudes of 4,000m, 6,000m and
Blue' (c/n 5203125) seen from a sister ship
probably a tanker. Production aircraft usually pilot Yuriy T Alasheyev at the controls. A total of B,0OOm, the K-1M radar had a detection range
had strake aerials on the lorward fuselage, as 18 flights was made, totalling t hours and 14 of 160km, and lock-on and automatic target
distinct lrom the prototype which had 'towel rail' minutes. The KS-1 was released ai altitudes tracking were stable and consistent. When fly-
aerials. Yefim Gordon archive
between 3,500 and 4,000m and indicated air- ing with a single missile under the port wing,
Tu'l6KS shortly speeds up to 370km/h without any detrimental stability could be maintained by transferring
Below right: This view of a
before missile launch shows the angular radome effeci on the aircraft's handling; the aircraft's fuel to the starboard wing, and when the
(a fealure ol production examples) in lully AUW was 58,0OO-59,000kg With two missiles antenna for the K-1M was lowered it was rec-
deployed position, the missile launch operator's the Tu-16KS clocked a maximum speed of ommended that the maximum speed should
entry hatch immediately aft of it and the ventral not exceed 520-55Okmih to prevent vibration
575km/h without any vibration generated by
windows llanking the said hatch. from the radome. After these tests Tu-16KS c/n
Ye{im Gordon archive the external stores. The take-off run with two


Tupolev Tu-1 6
The KS-I missile under the starboard wing of
Tu.16KS'18 Red' ignites its engine prior to
launch. Yefim Gordon archive

Seconds later, the missile lalls away and

accelerates towards its target.
':'iim Gordon archive

-200305 was ferried to Bagherovo airfield in the

l: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. missiles- six against target vessels and five the K-1 6 complex for use against surface ships,
The Tu-16KS was given the NATO reporting against ground targets with radar reflectors. bridges, dams, power stations, factories, rail
- zne Badger-}. Out of the six launches against targets ships junctions, airfields and other targets of impor
over a range of 90-96km there were four hits, tance. ln May-July 1957 a production Tu-1 6KS
Tu- 1 6KSR Development Aircraft one miss and one discounted launch due to a ('49 Red', cln 72036081'7124') was converted
--: 90-km range of the KS-1 and its subsonic failure of the guidance system. The 52.721V liq- into the first experimental carrier aircraft for the
.::ed soon ceased to satisfy the requirements uid{uel rocket motor designed by Aleksandr M K-16 complex as the Tu-16KSR-2. State accep-
:' ihe Soviet Air Force which needed a new lsayev's OKB proved reliable, igniting without tance trials involving the State Committee for
:-:ersonic missile with a range of up to 150km. any problems after release at altitudes between Aviation Hardware (GKAT - Gosoodarstvennyy
- : nsequently, in the mid- 1 950s OKB- 1 55 4,000 and 10,000m and speeds between 400 komitet po aviatsionnoy tekhnike), the State
=:=1ed working on ways of improving on the and 500km/h. lt functioned as required in two Committee for Electronics (GKRE
' using an improved control and guidance
3-1 . modes: maximum power, with athrust of 1,200- Gosoodarsfve n nyy kom itet po r a hd i oe I e ktron -
-.siem and a missile propelled by a liquidJuel 1,22okg and cruise, with a thrust of 680-700k9, ke) and the State Committee for Defence Tech-
-::{et motor. On 29th April 1957 MAP issued after in-flight ignition. nology (GKOT - Gosoodarsfvennyy komitet po
:-:er No 169 tasking OKB-283 with developing Tests at altitudes of 4,000-10,000m showed o boronnoy tekhnike) w ere held between Octo-
-- - Rubicon guidance system based on the lat- that the new KS-PM guidance radar could detect ber 1960 and the end of March 1961. After
.:: Rubin-1 aircraft radar for the KS and its a ground target at ranges up to 200km and pro- these the complex was accepted for opera-
'::(et-powered development, the KSR (k4z- vide stable tracking over distances between 160 tional service once the problems thrown up by
ahyy snaryad raketnyy - rocket-propelled and 180km. At a distance of up to 13-1skm the the trials had been dealt with. (Note: ln 1957
^ged missile). An experimental form of the missile's own homing radar took over. ln MAP was 'demoted' to a State Committee
-.,siem was to be ready for tests by the third launches against maritime targets, detection along with several other ministries due to
:-arter of 1957, with Tupolev's OKB-156 and acquisition depended on a number of fac- changing government policies. The unlucky
:-arged with preparing the technical docu- tors, including the type of target and the angle of ones included the Ministry of Electronics lndus-
-::ltation for an adaptation of the Tu-1 6KS by approach. The results of these tests formed the try (MRP - Ministerstvo rahdiotekhnicheskoy
-- !,. Meanwhile, OKB-155 was working on a basis for the development of new air-to-sudace promyshlennosti) and the Ministry of Defence
- -,',' rocket-propelled air-to-surface missile. missile carrier combinations and for the K-11 lndustry (MOP Ministerstvo oboronnoy
1 the autumn of 1958 two examples of the and K-16 with their different guidance systems. promyshlennosti). ln 965, however, their
---16 had been fitted with the Rubicon system names and status were restored after Nikita S
:: crder245', oneto carrythe KS-1 missile and The Tu-l6KSR-2 (Tu-16K-16) Khruschchov had been unseated and replaced
--= other the KSR, and sent for trials at ('order 352E', izdeliye NKSR-2 and NK-Z) by Leonid I Brezhnev as the Soviet leader.)
3:_rherovo range. During the trials held The KSR-2 missile, a production derivative of The success of the K-16 complex prompted
:.:,veen 1st July and 15th November the the KSR, was carried by the Tu-16 equipped GKAT to propose to the Sovlet Ministry of
:,rerimental Tu-16KSR launched eleven KSR with the Rublcon guidance system as part of Defence that 1 00 examples of the Tu-1 6KS and

Tupolev Tu-16 39


6 r ; 1La ''11,,i ffii,tffilirr;'s'1ii"

a* ! i

The Tu-1 SKSR-2 prototype, '49 Red' (ci n
72036081'7124'), seen during trials; note the
phototheodolite calibration markings on the
forward fuselage. This aircralt survived the
break-up of the Soviet Union, becoming
,g, Ukrainian Air Force'25 Blue'. Tupolev JSC
. JF*.F'X
*'ffi: Tu-1 SKSR-2'65 Blue' (cln 72038201'7164') was
converted from a Tu-16KS. Note the open exhaust
doors for the engine's S-300M turbostatters on
the engine housings. Tupolev JSC
i ;*. il-,s:,j+'r'1..1
Front view of Tu-1 6KSR-2 c/n 7203820 during
State 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 alterations
and adjustments, but their successful outcome
confirmed 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.
300 Tu-164 bombers should be converted to ln 1962 work on converting Tu-16KSs to It was powered by an lsayev 55-6 twin-chamber

carry the KSR-2 and equipped with the Rubicon carry two KSR-2 missiles began in DA and rocket motor burning TG-02 hypergolic (that is,
guidance system. lt was also suggested that AVMF maintenance units. A total of 50 exam- self-igniting) fuel (called TT-S2 in some docu-
the viability of adapting the supersonic Tu-22 ples was refitted with the K-16 system. Such air- ments) and AK-20F oxidiser which provided up
bomber to carry the KSR-2 should also be craft were known as order 352E' in production to 1,200k9 initial thrust and up to 700k9 thrust at
explored. (the E denoting a modified Tu-16KS which, as normal cruising speed. An 840-B50kg high-
On 4th February 1961 the Soviet Council of mentioned earlier, was the delivery vehicle for explosive warhead was fitted, but provision was
Ministers issued directive No117-49 spelling the KS-1 , aka izdeliye E), The service designa- made for fitting a nuclear warhead. Production
out the performance specification for the K-16 tion was Tu-16KSR-2 or izcieliye NKSR-2: KSR-2s were 8,62m long, with a wingspan of
weapons system. This document ordered addi- sometimes this version was referred to as the 4,52m and an all-up weight of 4,077-4,100k9. A
tional development work and testing to be car- Tu-16K-16 or izdeliye NK-3 (although some maximum speed of 1,260km/h was reached
ried out on the guidance system - particularly sources call it Tu-1 6KS-KSR 2 ). over a flight distance of 120-140km. One or two
the KSR-2's KS-PM radar which was given a Also in 1962, the first two operational KSR-2s could be carried and launched either
larger antenna dish. Atter passing State trials in Tu-16KSR-2s, '65 Red' (cln 72038201'7164') simultaneously or individually. Preparations
July-August 1961 the K-16 system was cleared and '66 Red' (c/n 5202010), converted from a for launch were the responsibility of the naviga-
for service with the Long-Range Aviation and Tu-16KS and a Tu-16A bomber respectively) tor, the automated processes carried out by
the Naval Air Arm pursuant to Co{M directive underwent checkout trails at GK Nll WS. The the Rubicon system making the provision
No 1 1 84-51 4 of 30th December 1 961 . two aircraft differed from those tested in 1960 in of a WSO (as on the Tu-16KS) unnecessary.

40 Tupolev Tu-16
,',ien Tu-164 bombers were converted to Tu-1 6KSR-2A (Tu-1 6A-KSR-2) Tu-16KSR-2
---16KSR-2 standard, they retained the capa- ('order 352A', izdeliye NKSR-2 and NK-Z) (modified under'order 68412')
: iyto carryfree{ali nuclear bombs. ln parallel with the modification of the Tu-16KS As mentioned above, initially the Tu-16KSR-2
The Rubicon-1 K radar could detect and and Tu- 1 6KS (ZA) into the Tu-1 6KSR-2, ref its of could not carry bombs. However, after modifi-
::rect a target at a range of 300-350km. lt then the Tu-164 and Tu-16 (ZA) were also carried cations under 'order 68412', tree-tall bombs
::ssed the information to the missile's own out but their capability as bombers was could be carried in the bomb bay as on the
'SPM radar which had been locked on to the retained. In this aspect the Tu-16KSR-2A (con- Tu-16KSR-2A and the two sub-variants
.-get prior to launch. Once the KSPM was versions from the Tu-164 under 'order 3524') became identical in their capabilities.
-::eiving a clear signal from the target, the nav- difiered from the Tu-16KSR-2. Subsequently
;ator switched over to the missile's own track- this difference disappeared when the Tu-16KSR-2A
- g and
homing system. Missiles were launched Tu-16KSR-2 was again modified to carry (modified under'order 6841 1')
=: altitudes between 4,000 and 10,000m at bombs. The first Tu-164 to be refitted in this The Tu-16KSR-2A was able carry a limited
::3eds between 700 and Bookmih. After way was '66 Red' (c/n 5202010) which, as bomb load internally, but it was further modif ied
:-rching its missiles, the Tu-16KSR-2 could already mentioned, took part in the checkout under the terms of 'order 684/1 ' to carry bombs
-,'r away from the target thus reducing its vul- State trials in 1962. Under the terms of 'order externally, bringing its maximum bomb load to
-='ability to enemy anti-aircraft defences. No 3524' 155 examples of the Tu-164 were modi- 1 0,000k9,

=i system was initially fitted to the Tu-1 6KSR-2. fied as Tu-16KSR-2A (they were also some-
The following data refers to the K-16 air-to- times referred to as the Tu-16A-KSR-2). Tu-16KSR-lS
:-:ace missile system: Comparatively few Tu-164 and Tu-16KS were ln the early 1970s some Tu-16KSR-2s were fit-
converted to Tu-16KSR-2 (Tu-16KSR-2A) con- ted with ECM equipment to prevent detection
-: - lat radrus ot the Tu-1 6KSR-2* 1 ,900km figuration in the f irst half of the 1 960s due to the by enemy radars - either for individual protec-
: ;-: alt tude of carrier aircraft 4,000-1 1,000m decision to develop the K- 1 1 -1 6 combined sys- tion, using the SPS-S Fasol' (String bean)
--,: "g speed with launch at 10,000m 750-B00km/h tem able to use the KSR-2 with active radar active jammer, or for operations as a group,
-:'::: detection range homing and the KSR-1 1 with passive radar using the SPS-I00 Rezeda (Mignonette, pro-
':,',rs and large targets 320-340km homing. ln the 1970s the Tu-16KSR-2 and nounced rezedah) jammer. The latter was
:-;: b'idges 250-280km Tu-16KSR-2A were again refitted as the housed in a UKhO ECM fairing. Aircraft
:'g: surface vessels 200-220km Tu-16KSR-2-5 ('order 386A') as part of the K-26 equipped with these were designated
:--aL range of KSR-? 120-140km ASM system. Tu-16KSR-lS.
:, *!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


., rum TOW with two KSR-2 79,000k9
: - ^.i 29.500.30,300k9
'r, rum operational range
i-:":ance at maximum range 5 hours 20 mins
::-, ce ceiling t 1 1,900m
Above: Tu-l6KSR-24 '25 Blue' (c/n 5201604) shows oft its multiple eiector racks carried on the wing
- -: to service ceilrng
stations. Note Each MER carried eight 250-kg bombs. Tupolev JSC
,r :r a 62,000-kg take-otf weight 37 mins
--: to 10,000m with 62,000-kg TOW 21 mins Below: Front view of a Tu-l6KSB-2A showing the high-drag external stores. Tupolev JSC
-:.:-ol1 run with two KSR-2s:
,r :h a 75,800k9 take-off weight 2,200m
,', :h a 79,000k9 take-off weight 2,400m
.-r ng run +

,r :h brake parachute 1,200m

,', :hout brake parachute 1,600m
-' run s
,r ih brake parachute 1,450m
,', rhout brake parachute 1,900m

= 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-

^ame Badger-G.

Tupolev Tu-l6 41
ii iitifl
]. I litl rrit,

flti, i,'"




Tu-16K-1 1 ('order 285') The design work on the K-1 1 system took The K-11 was the first Soviet air-to-surface
Work on the K-1 1 weapons system was carried two years. By the end of 1959 the basic issues missile with passive radar homing for use
out in parallel with the K-16, the KSR-2 being of radar detection and target indication, as against enemy radars. radar-controlled anti-air-
given a passive radar homing system for use well as passive homing, had been solved (the craft defences and surface-to-air missiles. The
against the enemy's ground or shipborne former by the Ritsa system named after a lake in Tu-16K-1 1 modified from production Tu-164
radars and becoming the KSR-1 1 anti-radiation the Caucasus region) and the first models and Tu-l624 bombers could, like the
missile (ARM). Preliminary design work on the of the eniire system were ready for testing. Tu- 16KSR-2, also be used as a bomber. lt was
K-l 1 and its Tu-16KS carrier was initiated by Two examples of the Tu-16 were adapted at outwardly identifiable by an inverled T-shaped
Council of Ministers directive No902-41 1 of the Kazan' aircraft factory and designated directionJinder antenna on the extreme nose
20th July 1957 and MAP order No2BB of 31st Tu-16K-1 1 (in production they were referred (on the navigator's siation glazing frame). ln
July 1957, with project completion scheduled to as 'order 285'). The first Tu-16K-11 made order to accommodate the Ritsa radar detec-
for early the following year, manufacturer's its first flight from Kazan'-Borisoglebskoye in tion/homing system, save weight and keep the
tests in the spring of 1959 and final trials of the January 1960 and underwent flight testing at CG within prescribed limits the PU-88 fixed for-
whole complex in the autumn of 1959. The Zhukovskiy the following month. ln April it ward{iring cannon installation and the PKI gun-
question of updating the K-10 anti-shipping was joined by the second Tu-16K-1 1 and man- sight were removed. The KSR-1 t hardly
system (see later) with passive radar homing ufacturer's tests of the K-11 began in May. differed from the KSR-2 in its design and car-
was also to be examined. OKB-156 was to be Despite the Jundamental design complexity ried a high-explosive or explosiveJragmenta-
responsible for work on the Tu-16, the Ministry of the system's components, the tests were tion warhead. At 4,000k9 its all-up weight was
of Defence's Central Research lnstitute No 108 concluded successfully in the spring of 1962 '1
00kg less than the KSR-2's due to its lighter
(TsNll-108) for the search and target marking and the Tu-16K-1 1 was passed for operational guidance system (a 2PRF-10 passive homing
system, OKB-155 for the missile and Nll-648 for use by CofM directive No314-157 of 13th April radar in a nose radome which increased the
the guidance and passive homing system. that year. missile's length to 8.6m and an AP-72-11 mis-
sile autopilot which maintained course
between launch and impact). The missile was
launched once its radar had locked-on. After
launch and ignition, the KSR-11 climbed to
the same height as the Tu-16 and maintained
that altitude before finally entering a 30' dive
to impact. The Tu-16 could carry out any

Tu.16K-11-16'28 Red' (c/n 5202501), a convened

Tu-16A, seen during tests with two red/white
chequered KSR-11 missiles. This aircraft has
been retrofitted with an SPS-100 active iammer
in a boattail fairing supplanting the tail turret.
Tupolev JSC

Tu.16K-11-16'53 Blue' (c/n 4201005) is

preserved at the Central Russian Air Force
Museum in Monino near Moscow. This
illustrates the inverted-T antenna array of the
Ritsa radar homing system. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-1 6
i .,*. .qr"
i*-... :i€"+''
: .
Left: A technician screws a cover plate into place on a Tu-l 6K-1 1 -1 6 coded '73' where
the fixed lorward-firing cannon used to be. This aircraft has had its bomb carrying
capability restored under the terms of 'order 68412', as revealed by the open bomb
bay. Sergey and Dmitriy Komissarov archive

Above: Sorties were sometimes flown with only a single missile, as this Tu-16K-11-16
illustrates. Yefim Gordon archive

-::oeuvre after launch, including U-turns; Under the terms of'order 497A' 155 Tu-164 nose gun turret and gunsight. The missile
-: :arget tracking information was retained by and Tu-l64 (ZA) bombers were converted to pylons could be used for either KSR-2 ASMs or
-= KSR-1 1. Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 configuration and the KSR-1 1 ARMs. Outwardly the Tu- 1 6K-1 1 -1 6 dif-
-1e K-11 complex had a 2,000-km combat Tu-16KSR-2As were modified. ln service the fered from the Tu- 16KSR-2 in having extra skin
.:: rs with the aircraft flying at altitudes Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 was known as izdeliye'NK-1 1- panels on the weapons bay doors closing the
:::,'/een 4,000 and 11,000m. Missile launch at 16' or izdeliye'NK-2'. access hatch to the former WSO's cabin and
-- l00m was effected at a cruising speed 750- the cutout for the deleted Kobal't-P radar. ln
:-l<m/h. The radar detection range was 270- Tu-16K-1 1-16 addition, the undersurfaces of the machines
:: lxm, with the KSR-1 1 possessing a range of ('order 497E',izdeliye NK-l1-16 and NK-2) lacking bomber capability were natural metal.
-:lkm and a 'kill' probability of 80-90% (the 15 Tu-16KS missile carriers and a number of The designation Tu-16K-1 1-16KS was also
-:ading memory feature meant that the radar Tu- 1 6KSR-2s, as well as some Tu-1 65 SAR air- sometimes used where the conversion had
: rld in all probability be destroyed even if the craft which lacked bomb-carrying capability, been from a KS-1 ASM carrier.
:-:my switched it off). were also upgraded to Tu-16K-1 1-16 standard A total of 441 Tu-164, Tu-16 (ZA), Tu-16KS
lithough the K-11 system was accepted, it under the terms of 'order 497' (or 'order 497E' and Tu-16S aircraft were refitted to take the
=s decided to use the combined K-1 1 and if they carried KS-1 missiles). lnitially their abil- K-1 6 and K-1 1 - 1 6 weapons systems. Of these,
'-'6 for operational use. ity to carry bombs was not restored, but this 211 aicraft served with the Air Force and 230
was subsequently done on many of these air- with the Navy. The main delivery vehicle was
Tu-16KSR-2-11 craft. ln such cases, the underside of the the Tu-16K-11-16 which was equipped with
'order 497A', izdeliye NK-11-16 and NK-2) machine was painted white either completely SPS-5 and SPS-100 ECM sets. Refits were
--e high degree of commonality between the or partly. Conversion of the Tu-16KSR-2 into done at maintenance factories in the 1960s.
'SR-2 and KSR-1 1 suggested that they could the Tu-16K-1 1-16 entailed installation of the Later, in the 1970s, the Tu-16K-1 1-16 was mod-
:::h be fitted to the same carrier. Therefore, in Ritsa radar homing system and removal of the ified yet again to Tu-16K-26 configuration.
-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 two

K-11 anti-radiation missiles. Note the cutouts
in the outboard llaps allowing them to be
deployed without striking the missiles'fins.
"eiim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-1 6
A small number of Tu-16K-1 1-16 were sup- K-26 long-range stand-off ASM System surface missiles. With a length of 10.56m, a
plied to Egypt and lraq, taking part in the armed Design work on the new K-26 air-to-surface wing span of 2.6m and a launch weight of
conflicts in the Middle East in the early 1970s missile system bullt around the improved Rubi- 3,900k9, the KSR-5 had a maximum speed of
and 1980s (the 1973 Arab-lsraeli war and the con-1 KV radar and the new KSR-S ASM was ini- 2,500-3,000km/h and a flight altitude of 22,000-
lran-lraq war). tiated by Council of Ministers directive 25,000m. lts range Jrom low-altitude launch
The performance of the Tu-1 6K- 1 1 -1 6 barely No838-357 of 1 lth August 1962. The system was 200-240km, but up to 500km if launched at
differed from the Tu-16KSR-2, although the was to comprise either the Tu-16K-26 or a higher altitude. The KSR-5 could carry either
need to carry two guidance systems increased Tu-16KSR-2-5 or Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 as a carrier, a high-explosive warhead which detonated on
the former aircraft's empty weight to 40,600k9, two KSR-S (with conventional or nuclear war- impact with the target or a nuclear warhead set
necessitating a reduction of the fuel load to heads), KSR-2 or KSR-1 1 ASMs, and the Vzlyot for a predetermined height Later developments
29,000k9. The Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 and Tu-16K-1 1- (Take-off) guidance system. included the KSR-SP, KSR-SM, KSR-SB and
16, as well as the Tu-16KSR-2, were all known The KSR-S was developed by OKB-2-155 KSR-sN, as well as the D-sNM ([/V) target drone.
by the NATO reporting name Badger-G. (the missile branch of the Mikoyan OKB) during Flight tests and State trials of the K-26 com-
the late 1950s and early 1960s; its design plex were held between October 1964 and Dec-
Tu-1 6K-1 1-16 benefited from the experience gained with ember 1967, using two machines, a Tu-16K-26
(modif ied under'order 684 l2') the KS-1, KSR-2 and KSR-1 1 missiles, as well and a Tu-16KSR-2-5, modified from Tu-16K-1 1-
At first the Tu-16K- 1 1-16 lacked bomber capa- as with the Kh-22 for the supersonic Tu-22K. 16KS'54 Red' (cln 8204022i'8191') and
bility, but after modification under the terms of It was devised as a highly accurate delta-wing Tu-16KSR-2A'66 Red' (c/n 5202010) respec-
'order 68412' it could carry a full bomb load of 'fire-and{orget' missile for use against ground tively. During this first stage 82 flights and ten
up to 13,000k9 comprising 40 FAB-100 or or maritlme targets. The missile was powered Iaunches of the KSR-5 were made, five of these
FAB-250 bombs, or 26 FAB-500s, or four by a 55.35 three-chamber rocket engine to test the missile's active homing system. Data
FAB-1500s, or two FAB-3000s, or eight torpe- designed by the lsayev OKB and equipped derived from the tests recorded that the K-26
does (four in the bomb bay and four on under- with a VS-K active radar homing system, prov- system had an operational radius of 2,100km
wing pylons). ing superior to all preceding Soviet air-to- with two KSR-S; the missiles were launched
with the carrier cruising at 750-800km/h at an
altitude of 10,000m. The maximum range of the
KSR-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 to
speed up the trials they were later joined by
Tu-16K-26 cln 4200703 and Tu-16K-10-26'15
Red' (c/n 1793014). A total of 13 KSR-Ss were
launched at ground and maritime targets.
The K-26 system was accepted by the Long
Range Avlation and Naval Air Arm pursuant to
CofM directive NoBB2-315 of 12th November
1969. 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.

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 or
izdeliye NK-4, and during conversion as 'order
386'. The Tu-16K-26 differed from the
only in its new ASMs and the
Tu-16K-1 1-16
equipment 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 force
B*--- repair and maintenance units began in 1969.

'54 Red' (clnA2O4O221'A191'), the Tu-16K-25

prototype, at GK Nl VVS during State acceptance
trials. The sleek KSR-s missiles make a striking
contrast with the ASMS carried by the Tu-l6
hitherto. Tupolev JSC

Front view of the Tu-1 6K-26 prototype. Note how

the missiles'ventral lins lold to provide
adequate 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-25
il[:::f;:r.Be: the aircraft received white
ilrrcEF:rrfaces late in its llying career. The
il{r--e */as probably taken at the Air Force
w,r:--:e in Kiev where the aircratt ended up
h i :-3und instructional airlrame.
' : -'::n

: : :::* below refers to the Tu- 1 6K-26:

-a 75,800k9
:. -::: cnal combat condtttons) 79,000k9
43,800 litres

- - - ::rm ssible lVach number 0,88
-: :-: 'afge+ 4,B00km
-.' ':: :s vrith a speed
'..::-:ing to [/ach 0,72 2,1 50-2,1 B0km

- :-: ^e power and canying one ortwo ASMs: t-

- --. ::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 , or a single missile plus a con-
: 1

'--:^ai 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 Tu-16KSR-2-5 two preceding modifications, the Tu- 1 6K-26 and
' :a"i complex) and the low-level KSR-SNM ('order 386A', izdeliye NKSR-2-5 and NK-5) Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1, it was not equipped to carry
= ,-::-drone. One hundred and ten examples of the the KSR-1 1 or KSR-SP anti-shipping missiles.
Tu-16KSR-2A were also conveded for the K-26 The equipment fitted on the Tu-16KSR-2-5
---16KSR-2-5-11 system under the terms of 'order 3864', analo- differed from that on the Tu-16K-26 in that it
:rder 386A', izdeliye NKSR.2-5-11 & NK.5) gous to the conversions of the Tu-1 6K-1 1 -1 6KS included a PKI reflector sight, an SP-50 blind
- -::: the terms of 'order 386A' 125 examples into the Tu-16K-26 and the Tu-16KSR-2-11 into Ianding system, and later an active ECM capa-
: --: Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 (which retained bomber the Tu-16KSR-2-5-11. The Rubin-Ritsa link bility consisting of a SPS-SM and SPS-151/
..::cility) were equipped as K-26 complexes equipment was not installed. The Tu-16KSR-2-5 1521153 from the Siren' (Lilac, pronounced
- : : milar way to the Tu- 16K-26, carrying a pair could be used as a bomber and carried two seeren') complex. But the reconnaissance,
-- - SR-2, KSR-1 1 or KSR-S missiles of various KSR-2 or KSR-S missiles of various subtypes and target-indicating equipment and the
--31_,,pes (excluding the KSR-SP). Outwardly (including the KSR-5NM target drone). Unlike the bombsight were omitted (although some
- -. 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'. Once +ffr*@
lgain 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-eight
rhaped aerial on the tail guns (probably
:ssociated with a data link system). Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tu-16 45

,di lfli llilllr

Above left: A'production' Tu'16KSR'2-5

-t conversion 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 the
inlet ducts into upper and lower channels, as
well as the area-ruled shape of the engine
housings. Tupolev JSC

retained their OPB-1 12 bombsight which came greater detection range. lt was therefore quite and hence the distinctive aerial of on the nose
into use once more when they were recon- different in appearance from the other Tu-16 glazing. Like the Tu-16K-26 'Rubin-1 M', it also
verted to bomber capability under the terms of missile-carrier versions, being readily identifi- lacked the PU-88 nose gun installation. This ver-
'order 68412').fhe version had the same defen- able by the large teardrop radome under the sion subsequently served as the basis for the
sive armament as the Tu-164. centre fuselage and the lack of the usual chin Tu-16 Tsiklon-N weather research aircraft.
Externally the Tu-16KSR-2-5 differed from radome whose position was faired over. This
the Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 in lacking the Ritsa radar was because the Rubin-1M was too large and Tu-16K-26M
homing system's inverted-T aerial on the navi- heavy and would have caused CG problems if (izdeliye NK-26M)
gator's station glazing and in possessing a installed under the nose. The new radar instal- ln the late 1970s the KSR-s ASM was updated
PU-BB nose gun mounting, and it differed from lation necessitated the removal of the No 3 fuel as the KSR-SM or KSR-SB with new guidance
the Tu-16K-26 in lacking the panels on the tank, causing a reduction in the fuel capacity by systems designed to strike smaller more diffi-
bomb bay doors. lt also had a different kind of 31 50 litres, but the range of the KSR-5 ASM was cult targets. Several Tu-16K-26 were modified
antenna above the pilots' cockpit from that on increased to 450km. On this version the PU-BB for this complex, known as the K-26M.
the Tu-'1 6KSR-2A. nose gun installation was deleted.
Tu-16K-26 with the Rubin'1M Radar Tu-16KSR-2-5 with the Rubin-1M Radar ('order 2226', izdeliye NK-26N)
From 1973 onwards some Tu-16KSR-2-5-11s This version did not carry Ritsa radar homlng The K-26N system was based on the KSR-SN
were fitted with the Rubin-1 M combirred radar equipment and therefore could not use anti- low-level air-to-surface missile, its Tu-1 6K-26N
and optical sighting system. This was an radar missiles. Externally it differed from the ver- carrier having its Rubin-1 KV radar replaced by
upgraded version of the Rubin-1KV with a sion detailed above in lacking ARM compatibility a new radar under the centre fuselage opti-

Tupolev Tu-1 6
-::.= eft and right: '44 Red',
r -u-16K-26 with a Rubin-lM
'rriar. rests between
mssions. Note the open
rnb bay. Yelim Gordon
: l' ,2

-+15K-26 '72 Blue' (cln

il93001) was converted
??n1 a Tu-16A bomber,
rence the white undersides.
lcte the taired ventral
rlEi-collision light on the
siarboard nosewheel door,
r reature added to most
-.-16s in service.
:'' - Gordon archive

-llS upper view of a

-+1 6K-25 illustrates the
rr].g planform with the
rightly kinked leading
rdge near the inboard wing
Tna€s. the sharper sweep
!' ttle horizontal tail and the
trgine nacelle tail fairings.
:- - Gordon archive

j-: Some Tu-l6K-26s were

itted with the Rubin-lM radar
fi a large teardrop radome
rnder the centre fuselage
nr-stead of the usual chin
-rdome housing an RBP-4
-rdar, This example carrying
i single KSR-s was
rTtercepted by NATO lighters
rr'er the Baltic Sea,
:=:1 Gordon archive

: -:: A Tu-l6K-26 with a

3ubin.1M radar prepares to
:ake contact with a Tu-l6(2)
aker. Yelim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-1 6 47
carried out at Naval Air Arm repair and mainte-
nance bases. The following data refer to the
t K-26P system:

2 400km

2 330km
9 000-1 1,000m


3 000km/h
mised for low-level operations. A small number It used a Tu-16KSR-2-5-11 equipped with the
of Tu-16K-26s, Tu-16K-26Ps, Tu-16KSR-2-5s Plot (Raft) compatible passive radar homing/
'T"_-e{,24: ::.-, -;:,,,: iS:.:r AS"ls ai opt mum
and Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1s were updated to Tu-16- guidance system as the carrier aircraft which
received the designation Tu-16K-26P. The two
a::,::s,',:':,: ::,',:- -:: : a.';-:t'atadistance
26N configuration in accordance with 'order .iaa'
u!--. -:,^- - :.:-:.
2226' and served with the Naval Air Arm in the missiles could be launched against the same
1980s. lJ the KSR-SN was used by the already target or different targets (one of which, how-
mentioned versions without modification, it ever, had to be in line with the aircraft's line of Tu-16K-26PM
was launched ai the same altitude as the flight), after which the aircraft was able to turn (izdeliye NK-26PM)
KSR-S, subsequently descending to its desig- away. The standard K-26 equipment fit was Aircrafi brougiri ,rc :o K-26PM standard and
nated flight altitud€ to enable stealthy retained so that KSR's, KSR-2 or KSR-1 1 mis- carrying KSR-5i'.i and KSR-1 1 missiles were
approach to the target. siles could be carried. Only the Siren' jammer oesignatec Tu-16K-26PNl or rzde\iye NK-26PM
was omitted. and vrere ec;rpceC ',','rin ine AMP-IV communi-
Tu-16K-26P The experimental Tu-16K-26P ('order 397 ) cator iinKing ihe ai:cra;1 and missile radars.
('order 397', izdeliye NK-26P) began its factory tests in the summer of 1967
Developed in accordance with Council of Min- with State trials commencing in April 1972. On Tu-1 6K-268 (izdeliye NK-26B)
isters directive No 123-43 of 7th February 1964, 4th September '1973 the K-26P system was This vras a srrb-\,a:;an: o: the Tu-l6K-26 modi-
this system was designed around the KSR-SP cleared for Soviet Navy service by Council of fied under the ier,.ns ci order 684i2' 1o carry
anti-radiation missile with passive radar hom- Ministers directive No643-205. Conversions ol a greaier ioac of cornbs or mines carried
ing (P = ptotivolokatsionnayalraketal -ARM). Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1s to the new standard were both internaliy and extefnally. The B referred to
the bomb arrnarnent (bombardirovochnoye
vo oroozhentye).

One 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-26s

were updated to Tu-16K-26P standard with
characteristic ECM antenna fairings at the
tip 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 gear
doors and'18 Blue' on the tin!
Yelim Gordon archive

Tu-l6K-26P '66 Red' (cln7203614) with two

KSR-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-10

Ilustrates the trademark nose radar
erangement, the semi-recessed K-10S missile
s1d the missile launch operator's cabin in the
F-€pons bay just aft of it. Tupolev JSC

:u-16 ASM Carriers with Restored and

ncreased Bombing Capability
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
due to the smaller fuel load and increased fuel based on the Kometa. This was to be the K-10S
..22 in Kazan' (referred to as the Tu-16A- consumption. which, unlike the KS-1, would be supersonic,
'Sl-2 in documents) with increased bomb On the basis of the tests carried out on these possess a significantly greater range and a
:.Js of up to 13,000k9, 4,000k9 of which was two aircraft, work on restoring the bomber 150% improvement in accuracy. lts primary tar-
::-:.ed externally. The aircraft attained a maxi- capability (as per 'order 68412') was carried out gets were to be vessels with a displacement in
--m speed of 820km/h at 7,550m and had a by repair and maintenance factories on the excess of 10,000 tonnes. A new guidance sys-
::-rice ceiling of 11,100m, with a take-off Tu-16KSR-2, Tu-16K-11-16, Tu-16K-26 and tem, the K-10U. was devised by a team led by
:ght of 60,000k9. At optimum altitudes and Tu-16KSR-2-5, and on increasing bomb carry- S F Matviyevskiy based on the YeN airborne
:r a 13,000k9 bomb load the aircraft had a ing capability (as per 'order 684/1 ') on the radar. The work on the new system was kicked
-:ximum operational range of 2,820km with a Tu-1 64, Tu-1 6KSR-2A and Tu-1 6KSR-2-1 1 . off by CofM directives No178-1 10 of 3rd
-3ximum weight of 79,000k9 and 2,400km February 1955 and No1946-1045 of 16th
:r a weight of 75,800k9. Tu-l6K-10 November 1955; plant No22 in Kazan'
n comparison with the original Tu-16KSR-2 ('order 238', izdeliye NK-10, izdeliye NK-l1 was charged with modifying a Tu-16 into
::'rying two KSR-2 missiles, the range with a ln the early 1950s Mikoyan's OKB-155 and the prototype of a new missile carrier desig-
: 000k9 bomb load and with a normal take-off Tupolev's OKB-156 co-operated in the devel- nated Tu-16K-10, using drawings supplied
',:,ght of 75,800k9 was reduced by 1,430km opment of a new air-to-surface missile system by OKB-156.

-:; . .-- Ail|

Tupolev Tu-1 6
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 blister
fairing supplanting the ventral gun barbette and
the teardrop fairing under the starboard wingtip;
the latter houses a cine camera to record
lilriili,liii;ll'li r"f'l ' l
l, , r,r*,,,,',t11l1irili rtlli irrl ,
''tlii, :ll 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 cruise
flight. 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
and was based on the Tu- 1 6 bomber, drawing
: sts#s
on the experience acquired during the devel-
,. ''-l *"..d;.. f, "i .' -.# opment of the Tu-16KS. The Tu-16K-10 was
.+ .Sr
G 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
Hir rlr :rii I i:til iillil j,
,+;.- fuselage. The work on fitting the YeN radar and
'r 'i 'r
: F,i.ff"..
modifying the weapons bay to accommodate
fi 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
The K-10S had a mid-set wing swept back radar homing and command system as it came
engine started; after launch the inwards-open-
55' and tail surfaces with 55'30' sweepback' within a pre-set range of the target. The missile
ing weapons bay doors were closed pneumat-
Some examples had a ventral fin The missile was also equipped with YeS-3A autopilot (ln
ically. The special door/Pylon design meant
had a shaped-chargeihigh-explosive warhead, the designations of the guidance system's
that the Tu-16K-10 could not carry bombs or
either the FK-1O ('one-o') or FK-1 M - the latter components, N stood for nosife/'- carrier [air-
mines, and no strike cameras were fitted'
{or striking large naval vessels below the water- craftl and S for snaryad - missile )
An attribute of the K-1OS was that the missile
ln 1957 OKB-156 passed the conversion
line. Nuclear warheads could also be used documents to plant No 22 in Kazan' , where the
Propulsion was by a Mikulin M-9FK afterburn- manoeuvred in both horizontal and vertical
first two Tu-16K-10 prototypes (converted from
planes en route to the target After launch, the
ing turbojet, a disposable short-life version of brand-new Tu-16s with the c/ns 7203805 and
slightly, then flew straight as
th; RD-98 fitted to the MiG-19 fighter' Launch missile lost height 7203806) were completed in November ano
radar beam At a range
and guidance were semi-autonomous and it entered the aircraft's December. ln October the {irst K-10S to be
1Okm from the target it began a shallow
could be effected eiiher from a ground control of 100-1 assembled was sent for tests by GK Nll WS ln
levelling out when some 60 to 70km {rom
station or from the carrier aircraft Detection of dive, January 1958 the two prototypes were ready
the target and again assuming horizontal flight
the target by the YeN radar depended on the for flight tests; the first flight took place on 4th
aircraft's flight altitude but was about 480km' at an altitude of B0O-1 .000m until some 10 or
January and the tests continued until 29th Sep-
with missile launch at a range oI 12O-27Okm' 16km remained; at this point ihe active radar
tember. Part of the programme was pedormed
Once the target was detected, the radar locked
homrng system was activated for terminal
guidance. lmpact was at very low level either with Air Force participation at GK Nll WS's
on and the automatic tracking system was acti- main facility in Akhtoobinsk, southern Russia
vated. After launch the K-1 0S entered the beam
above or below the target vessel s waterline'
acceptance trials had started
of the aircraft's radar and was guided by it The
The missile's vulnerability to anti-aircraft Before the State was put through its paces on the
the YeN radar
was reduced by its speed' relatively
guidance system on the missile consisted of defences two prototypes, while the YeS system was
two parts: the first (YeS-2D) guided the missile' small radar signature and the brief period in MiG-195 fighl
tested on two specially modified
its homing radar could be jammed After
using signals transmitted by the aircraft, and which ers designated Mic-l95MK (c/ns 61 210418
launch the aircraft could make an B0'turn away
made altitude corrections, while the second and 61 21 041 9). The f irst K-1 OS test launch f rom

own active from the target (the K-1OS then followed a

(YeS 1) comprised the missiles

50 I uoolev I u- tt)
:tis view of the first prototype Tu-16K-10 shows
row the missile is lowered clear of the fuselage
refore 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 the
reapons bay. Tupolev JSC

: .u-16K-10 prototype in autonomous mode defects in the guidance system. Constant prob- duction soon; it was planned to replace the
.1 inout using the guidance and homing sys- lems with the YeN radar and YeS receiver, as Tu-16 with lhe Tu-22 at plant No22 and the
-:11s) was made
on 28th May 1958, and on 21st well as with the missile's engine, resulted in all An-10 at plant 64 Voronezh. Nevertheless,
'.lvember the Tu-1 6K-1 0 prototypes were sub- five test launches at a range of 1 30-1 50km end- series production of the Tu-16K-10 was
- :ied for State trials. ing in failure. There were also problems with the initlated in Kazan'. The first production
Combined state trials of the Tu-16K-10, the aircraft's fuel system when subjected to G Tu-16K-10 (c/n 8204010) was rolled out at plant
' -: 0S missile and the K- 1 0 system as a whole loads for prolonged periods. Thus, by early No 22 in April 1958, and a mere five Tu-16K-10
.3re conducted by GK Nll WS over almost 1960, only six hits had been recorded. (ZA) aircraft featuring the wing{o-wing IFR
---ee years over various phases of develop- Council of Ministers directive No1475-685 system were built in 1958-59, whereupon
-:nt and with interruptions for further modifi- ordering the K-10 system into production was Tu-16 production in Kazan' was suspended
:::ions and trials of the system's components. issued on 31st December 1958, wlth produc- to free up production capacity for the Tu-22.
-^e last phase involved its operation in an tion of the K-10S missile allocated to aircraft Later, in October 1 959, the Tu- 1 6K-1 0 entered
=::ive ECM environment. After the first test factory No31 in Tbilisi. However, by this time production at plant No 1 at Kuibyshev in
:.:nch in May, five more were made between lhe K-22 complex based on the supersonic accordance with CofM directive No 709-337 of
--ne and September 1958 against small radar- 'aircraft 105' bomber (Tu-22) and lhe Kh-22 2nd July 1958. During production the
-:'lecting ground targets over a range of 96km ASM seemed to offer more promise. The K-10S Tu-16K-10 was designated 'order 238' and
:., a test crew headed by Hero of the Soviet was thus intended mainly for the obsolescent laier, in operational service, as Zdelrye NK-10
,"ion Lt Col V V Zentsov. Four hits were Tu-16 which looked set to be taken out of pro- or izdeliye NK-1 .
: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
:^e 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 prototype

Tu.16K-10 (c/n 7203806) with a K-l0S missile.
This aircraft has a similar ventral blister but no
cine camera fairing under the starboard wingtip.
--polev JSC

Tupolev Tu-16 51


-:: :: An inert K'10S missile bedecked with
photo 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
Tu'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

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:
i Top: Maintenance day in a Soviet Navy unit as a
gtc\ 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:'16Red'(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

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 Central
lommittee sent by the Deputy Chairmen of the
lcuncil of Ministers, Dmitriy F Ustinov and
3oris 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 4ii;,riirlliili' , lili
-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 tor' testbeds and 34 K-10S missiles, three of 50 or 60km. Although special maximum-range
-.l-1 6K-10 were built. which had live warheads. Out of the 20 tests on the missile had not been performed,
Dry launches of the K-10 were practised, launched, only 10 hit their targets. Failures were after one miss a K-l0S had carried on to cover
-sing ships of the Black Sea Fleet as targets, due to crew errors (one missile destroyed an ice 245km in ten minutes and ten seconds and
:rd live launches carried out against decom- floe instead of the target vessel), failures of the splashed down with some fuel still left. ln 1959
-ssioned vessels between September 1959 radars and one failure of the missile's engine. the K-10 achieved initial operational capability
:rd November '1960. The old tanker M/y' According to the system's designers there was with the Soviet Navy as the first highly effective
iakalov specially fitted with a tall wire mesh a71.4% chance of the K-10S hitting itstarget; in supersonic air-to-surface missile system.
:rntraption by way of a superstructure to the opinion of the Naval Air Arm it was only The K-10 had a maximum combat radius of
-srease the radar signature was used to simu- 62.4/o. Anolher unpleasant fact emerged during 2,400km; the carrier aircraft's cruising speed
a cruiser-sized target; if a missile hit the wire the trials; the location of the weapons systems was 700-B00km/h, and a target (a cruiser-sized
-esh, this was considered a 'kill'. In the course operator's pressurised cabin in the forward part vessel) could be detected at 240-360km. The
:' ihe joint State trials, Tu-16K-10 missile-carri- of the equipment bay where the air temperature K- 1 0S missile was launched at 1 70-200km f rom

='s made 184 flights. Problems encountered was somewhat higher than elsewhere in the air- the target at altitudes between 5,000-1 1,000m.
: -nng the trials delayed their official completion craft meant that he was subjected to tempera- the aircraft approaching within 110-150km of
-rtil the second quarter of 1960, although in tures over 40'C in the summer. the target by the time the missiie switched to
-=ality they were not completed until the end of There were, however, positive aspects to the active homing mode and flew on with an B0% 'kill'
- year. Only four launches were made in 1 960.
e trials. Large ships could be detected at dis- probability. The K-10S weighed 4,418-4,550k9
The trials program involved both Tu-16K-10 tances close to the theoretical radar horizon and with a normal warhead weighing B35kg. lts
:'ctotypes, the two Mic-lgSMK 'missile simula- a lock-on was achieved after closing by a further maximum speed was 1,700-2,000km/h.

Tupolev Tu-16 53


' 75Cm
]]JU I

Yefim Gordon archive

Top: '15 Red', another Kuibyshev-built Tu-16K-10(ZA)'

Above:Kazan,-builtTu-l6K-1o.12Blue'wasoneolseverallittedwithansPS-100Rezeda l- '- - --=-.: -I- :-: 3olncil of Ministers

::-:: : -::- : '.: -!2':'a clearing the K-10
iammer in a UKhO tail tairing. Yefim Gordon

glound' Note that the

::: :-: : :-:- -:- !:. =: \avYService lnthe
Below: The wings ol the K-l0S folded upwards to save space on the :---:- -'---1- .::-:'::-3iion examples of
Tu.15K-lointhebackgroundsportsthree.kill,starssignifyingsuccesslulmissilelaunches. :-: ----:'-' - ' :': S-1'''n OVer MOSCOW-
Yefim Gordon archive --:- -: -.-a==-' -::-:annual AviatiOnDay
**snk '.::.- :- : ,:: :-: '-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

54 Tupolev Tu'1 6


"**"" ".**. *{itrF*,*


llriliitlr,riii, i

- a UKhO tail fairing.

Others featured an Centre at Kool'bakino AB in Nikolayev indi- A steady stream of Tu-1 6K-1 0s passes overhead
during the 1961 Aviation Day parade.
>PS-100 Azaliya jammer in a UKhO fairing cated the possibility of launching the K-1OS
Yefim Gordon archive
:lmplemented by an SPS-S in the avionics from an altitude of 600m over a range of up to
::y.Some examples were retrofitted with ASO- 325km. Work on an improved system known as This Badger-c coded '15 Red' is the Tu-16K-10-26
the K-10M began in 1961 , but was complicated prototype carrying one K-10S missile and two
={-E7R IRCM flare dispensers.
by the simultaneous requirements to increase KSR-5 missiles. Yefim Gordon archive
Tu-16K-102A its range and decrease the altitude at which it
('order 238' , izdeliye NK-1024 and NK-1) was launched. The resulting missile was the
:s already noted, this was a version of the K-10SD with a greater fuel load, while its K-1OSDV (vysotnaya - high-altitude) could be
--r-1 6K-1 0 equipped for wingtip{o-wingtip lFR. Tu-16K-10D carrier was to have a modernised launched at any altitude between 1,500 and
3nly five aircraft were completed in this config- YeN-D radar with a detection range of 400- '1
1,000m, increasing the missile's effectiveness
-'ation in Kazan',later, however, all Kuibyshev- 45Okm (in both cases, D stands tor dahl'n- and making the aircraft less vulnerable. ln early
:.li1t Tu-16K-1 0s had IFR capability. odeystvuyushchaya - Iong-range). 1970 tests of the system against a target from
The K-10D complex with its longer-range medium altitude confirmed its value and viabil-
Tu-1 6K Development Aircraft K-10SD missile had obvious advantages when ity, after which some of the Tu-16K-1ODs were
Setween 1959 and 1961 GK Nll WStested three compared to the K-l0, but by the end of the again modified by Naval Air Arm maintenance
,ramples of the Tu-1 6K - a version of the 1960s the Western navies' shipborne anti-air- bases. These machines could carry K-1OSD
-:-1 6K-10 re-engined with RKBM (Zoobets) craft defences had greatly improved. Aircraft and K-1 0SDV missiles (launched from
:D16-1 5 turbojets. Aparl from structural modiJi- carrier groups had little difficulty in detecting a 1,500m), as well as the older K-10S and the
:ations, the electric starters of the new engines large subsonic enemy aircraft flying at cruising low-altitude K-10N and K-1OSNB, although in
-:quired additional DC batteries to be provided. altitude 500km away. lt was therefore decided these cases the attack range was curtailed. The
The Tu-16K was intended for use by the to extend the range of altitudes at which the K-IOSDViSN/SNB could be launched from
'raval Air Arm and differed little from the K-lOSD could be launched by modifying the 1 ,500m and the K-10S/SD from between 5,000

-;-16K-10, apart from its longer range thanks to airborne and missile radars. The resulting and 11,000m.
: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
fi 'sffi**"*--
\o742-315 of 12th August 1961 clearing the
-u-1 6K-1 0 for service ordered the K-1 0 system
as a whole to be updated; within three months 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
-=E;: l-. t

Tupolev Tu-1 6
Hea!-r i'tr 3' :u -- ':il.":-26 Prototype with
a :: r€:,-a:\:n: rH:-
- -: :

Tu-':r.-' :-l': ..- :,.€' =r5€s ci'er hilly terrain

9re.5;!F.Ac|'r r l-* !f r's' ;:: E:st). carrying a
i: =r-,:rs-sq f :-rg -L-(5 es. Traces otthe
t-:,--i-.inE... rEa-,F€,:: : - ...651034 (the
:'si 3!g- s r sl r-r:dlplft ! are discernible
,;#st\ 3-:-*:r

-: . -: ::: :- stage itwas

' :: --: '-i: -:hat is,'K-10'
: : - -- : ::s gnation was
:: - .-:.:':' use against
or Tu-1 6K-1 0D, but in these instances ths - :- -: .- -- ::: :argets, using
siles could only be launched at the airc':. : " - : - := :s ihe lattertwo
(izdetiye NK-l0N, izdeliYe NK'lN)
normal operating altitudes. : : - .^
-' ^^\
The increased potency of shipborne anti-air- ----:'-:a carried two
craft defences prompted another develop- '-: .', -g hardPoints
Tu-16K-1OP --
ment of the K-10 to enable it to be launched at ' :: : . :::- alSO Called
low level. Estimates suggested that decreas- Between 1972 and 1979, developmer: ,',:-'
ing the height at which the missile was was carried out on fitting an Azaliya aci '3.:-- : : -;:'.-'lSD or K-10S
mer to a K-1OSN missile in lieu of a \\a".?= :'. -; ,'.:^ ihe YeN-D
launched would halve its vulnerability to anti-
Designated K-1OSP (tor pomekhi- inte.E-:-:: : ' -- --:a :'3iotypes were
aircraft fire and fighter interdiction. The
K-1OSN and K-1OSNB (the latter with a nuclear or jamming), this 'ECM missile' was ic c: -:=: '.:.- -. -:-:.'actory No22
warhead) were carried by the Tu-16K-10N to cover the launch of ordinary live miss :s =-_ :' '--= : -s 1793014and
-:-:: ,',:s coded '15
(izdeliye NK-10N) equipped with a modified carried by an aircraft designated Tu-i 6{-- -=
': -: :': :-: -anUfaCtUrer'S
YeN-2-6 radar and could be launched from an The complex was designated the K-i CF -

The Tu-16K-102A, Tu-16K-10D. Tu-' 6^l-- -"

: : -: : :.- ::-'.:Vembef 1966
altitude of 500-600m; the N suffix stood for
nizkovysotnaya - low-altitude. During the ter- and Tu-16K-10P shared the commc' '.:-: :,,- - '--'- -: ii State trials
codename Badger-C.
:.:- -- : ,- -.itomodifica-
minal guidance phase the missile flew only a
few metres above the water. The range at
: :: : : - '.- ' '2- sYstem, theY
Tu-16K-10-26 - -' : - :: - ::--::: --::l MaY 1968
which a'cruiser-type' target could be attacked
by the K-IOSNB was in the order of 350 to ('order 644', izdeliye NK-10-26 and NK'6\ - : - -: ' ' -: '- : <-1 0-26 system
42Okm. The Tu-16K-10N could carry a stan- The K-26 anti-radar weapons svs::- ":: : ::-:= --:-:Naval AirArm
dard K-10S, but had to launch it at altitudes incorporated not only on Tu-1 6 ASI;1 .='::-. - -:':': : -::: '3 NO882-315,
between 5,000 and 1 1 ,OOOm. The K-1OSN and used against ground targets but c. :-:-:--- - -. -:- =-= :- :'35Tu-16K-10D
K-1 OSNB could also be used by the Tu- 1 6K-1 0 ping versions as well. The modiies s.,:::- - -: = '-:'-': --. rlodifications,

56 Tupolev Tu'16
-his aircratt coded'63 Red'represents the
-u-16K-10-268 version featuring conventional
iomber capability; note the MBDU.46-68N MERs
-nder the fuselage. Yefim Gordon archive
Tu-16K-10-268s are equipped with single
3D4-16-52 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 tion Tu-16K-10-26N (or izdeliye NK-10-26N). Tu-1 6K-1 0-268 ('order 26448', izdeliye
- -1ner's position. Externally the Tu-16K-10-26 The simultaneous use ol two high-speed, high- NK-1 0-268, izdeliye NK-68)
altitude KSR-5 missiles with a low-altitude mis- The issue of enhancing the tactical and strategic
=s distinguishable from other
versions of the
---16K-10 by the underwing missile pylons. sile of the K-1 0S type put the enemy anti-aircraft potential of the Tu-16K-10 by reactivating its
ihe performance was almost identical to that defences in a much tougher situation. bomber, mine-laying and torpedo-bomber capa-
:' ate-production Tu-16K-10s, with the follow- bilities was raised several times by the Soviet Air
-l exceptions: Tu-1 6K-1 0-26P('order 23O3','order 644P', Force, culminating in CofM directive No709-337
izdeliye NK-l0-26P, izdeliye NK-26P) of 2nd July 1958 ordering the Tupolev OKB to
. :-: empty with residual fuel 41 ,850k9 ln keeping with ruling No 14 passed by the Coun- explore the possibility of using lhe Badger-C tor
:::cn load cil of Ministers' Military lndustrial Commission (a delivering conventional and nuclear freeJall
: -: K-1 0S 4,400k9 standing committee on defence matters) on 21st bombs by 1st August. Accordingly in the
- ,: KSR-5 7,600k9 January 1976 and pursuantto MAP order No56 the Tu-16K-10-26 underwent such a modification
:-e KSR-5 3,800k9 of 9th February 1976, in the late 1970s a small at Naval Air Arm maintenance factories to enable
: KSR-S and one K-1 0S 1 2,000k9 number of Tu-16K-10-26s with ECM tail fairings it to carry a 4,000-kg bomb or mine load or four
:-: KSR-S and one K-10S B,200kg were modified to carry KSR-SP missiles and 650-kg torpedoes under its wings (using multi-
i.-, :e range* 4,700km equipped with the ANP-K system for locating ple-store racks under the fuselage and racks
active enemy radars. Designated Tu-16K-26P, attached to the standard missile pylons) and a
' .: :liimum altitude with a K-l0S and a 75,800-kg take-off the aircraft could carry KSR-Ss with active radar further 4,000k9 of bombs or mines or four more
= ;-: with 5% fuel reserves and mid-flight missile launch homing or KSR-SP ARMs, as well as normal torpedoes internally. Designated Tu-16K-10-
attack missiles (one K-10S and two KSR-Ss or 268, it possessed both air-to-surface missile and
Tu-'l6K-10-26N KSR-2s of various versions). The revised com- conventional bomber capabilities. Examples of
eliye NK-1 0-26N, izdeliye NK-6N)
izd plex was given the designation K-10-26P. The the Tu-16K-10-268 modified to carry bombs or
Tu-16K-1 0N modified to take the K-26 Tu-16K-10-26 and Tu-16K-10-26P shared the torpedoes in this way were referred Io as izdeliye
.:apons system was given the new designa- NATO codename Badger-C Mod. NK-10-268 or NK-68 in service.


il;13-l',"*,,,*.,,, *

Tupolev Tu-1 6
Chapter Five

Reconnaissance and
Electronic Gountermeasures Verstons
Tu-16R & Tu-16RN (aircraft'92' project) - a new Apatit (Apatite) active jammer with a 2-
1Ocm waveband for jamming enemy ground ar:
OKB- 1 56 began work on a reconnaissance air-
craft based on the Tu-1 6 bomber in 1 953' From shipborne detection, guidance and target
marking radars. This was again the respons:bt :i
the outset, the resulting aircraft was conceived
of TsNll-106 which was to co-operate with
as combining photographic reconnaissance,
OKB-1 56 in installing this on a Tu-16 during tr:e
electronic intelligence (ELINT) gathering and
autumn of 1 954,
the resources to jam enemy air defence radars'
Much depended on the design and production - anew Avtomaht2 (Automatic device) airborr-
of the crucial electronic equipment. automatic chaff dispenser to scatter radar-
The Council of Ministers directive No 1659- reilecting strips of metal-coated glassfibre 1c'a'
657 of 3rd July 1953 and the corresponding at three- to five-second intervals, working in i'=
Minisiry of Defence lndustry order No521 of 0,6-12cm waveband. The equipment was tc ::
l Bth July called for the creation of the following: designed by I I Toropov's OKB-134 and reac, ':'
state trials on a Tu-16 in the late summer alc
- a new RBP-6 lyustra (Chandelier) bomb-aiming autumn o1 1954.
radar developed {rom the production Rubidiy-
MM-2 (Rubidium), able to overcome enemy ECM
- a new SRS-3 Romb-l (Rhombus) automai:c
ELINT set (SRS = stanhtsrya ranredki svyaz'-
by means of an ECM-resistant high-frequency -s:
head, a 2-cm waveband antenna/feeder array and communications intelligence set) for use aga
enemy ground, shipborne and aircraft raca's
an antenna with a wider scanntng arc. Two sets ol
the new equipment were to be provided by which registered the working frequencres oi:-:
TsNll-108 and OKB-253 by'1954, while OKB-156 radars it detected over the bandwidih 2 9 io

was to carry out the installation of one set on a 30cm. This was to be supplled by OKB-483 a^:
TsNll-108 and installed on a Tu-1 6 with the c:-
production Tu-1 6 in the autumn of that year'
operation of OKB-156.
- a new Sl/lkaht (Silicate) active jammer with a
21 .8-30.5cm waveband ior jamming enemy - a new electronic counter-countermeasures
(ECCM) highJrequency head and array
ground and shipborne air defence and lighter This cutawaY drawing dePicts two
developed under the P/aneta programme :: configurations of the Tu'15R PHOTINT aircraft
control radars. This was to be supplied by
TsNll-108 which was to co-operate with OKB-156
protect the lzumrood (Emerald) airborne for day (above) and night photography' Note the
intercept radar (developed for the MiG-17P flare boFnb cassettes of the latter configuration'
in installing the set in a Tu-16 in the |ate spring
'1955. interceptor) and Argon gun-laying radar v''ii a
and earlY summer ol

cauonB'r -pagsBAIll4K ,Tv- l6P"

BRpmanr' /{HEBHono PA3BEI+rI4KA
nnlevri -rn$um :o'"rom l.r-a* v+ ,' 'ft(- /r-hu

)'.cl ,

k!rrrAFt'e it!!etd !s@of 0 !iFrri! raa!040^qfdq

ciirtrDoi ! urnFL eo!.!if

Bapnanl HOLIHOIO 4
ktftfd lnr lE setlnEnhH!tr
?vr fruNiu! AV 21 4iisr 2l,v 5oMt lFbim/D S.$L- .

i, -r r:'-"'!" : t'nntr i0 ] r!ahee trrih$oQ snilmfa I
2osaoeomooNoF!na rAohV5C I s! tuodM. f,M 25 iriusq ll14
'r--:')'rtttrlrAi -$ !;'r i b/
afc Nqiou ootorlttxe

Tupolev Tu-1 6
The design and development of this new installing the ASO-16 chaff dispenser in place vented its submission for State trials. The
equipment involved the close co-operation of of the PR-1 , an estimated service ceiling (with Tu-16R-1 was also tested with various combi-
the aircraft designers, who had to work out the an all-up weight of 55,000k9) of 12,800m and a nation loads of flare bombs for night photogra-
best and most compact ways of installing it. On range of 6,000-6,200km. At 37,765k9, the phy. When the cameras were removed from the
24th June 1953 MAP issued order No405, fol- empty weight of the Tu-16R would have been equipment bay, the machine could be recon-
lowed by Air Force Operational Requirement 259k9 greater than the Tu- 16RN's. verted to bomber configuration.
No 1197989 which was received by OKB-156 on The positive results of the State trials were fol-
9th July; these documents required the OKB to Tu-1 6R-1 Reconnaissance Prototype lowed by an order for series production in
fit the PR-1 and Natriy to production Tu-16 air- Conversion was carried out on a production December 1956 (Council of Ministers directive
craft. After making some preliminary assess- Tu-1 6 bomber (c/n 1880302) built at the Kuiby- No1545-777 of 3rd December and MAP order
ments the Tupolev OKB judged it more shev aircraft factory No1 in December 1954. No601 of 1Oth December). The series produc-
expedient to develop a dedicated reconnais- Re-designated the Tu-16R-1 after modification tion model was to be powered by two AM-3M
sance version, the Tu- 1 6R (lsamolyot-l razved' at plant No 22, with the assistance of the Kazan' engines, and 44 examples were built in 1957 at
chik - recce aircraft) equipped for photographic branch of OKB-156, the first prototype carried a plant No 1 in Kuibyshev after the defects and
and electronic intelligence. This was accepted single AFA-33/20M vertical camera, two shortcomings noted during the prototype trials
cy the Air Force, and on 23rd June 1954 the AFA-33/75M for oblique photography and two had been rectified. The Tu-16R-1 was to
Council of Ministers issued directive No1249- AFA-33/1 0M for 'opportunity en route' photog- become the basis for a series of reconnais-
558 followed by MAP order No 408 of 29th June. raphy. An SPS-1 active jammer was also pro- sance and ECM versions of the Tu-16, including
These documents tasked Tupolev with building vided. The crew consisted of seven members, the Tu-16SPS, Tu-16P, Tu-16 Yolka and so on.
:he Tu-16R powered by two modernised with the radar operator housed in a special
AM-3M-200 engines (rated at 9,500k9 for take- pressurised position at the rear of the equip- Tu-16 Romb Reconnaissance Aircraft
cff and 7,650k9 at nominal power) giving a ment bay (the former bomb bay, that is). ('order 261')
'ange of 6,000-6,200km. The Air Force was to Manufacturer's flight tests began on 30th Although the SRS-3 Romb-1 was not available
clace one of its Tu-16s at the disposal of the OKB November 1955 and were completed by mid- in time for the manufacturer's tests or State tri-
n July 1 954 and supply the necessary radio and May 1955. Sixteen flights were made totalling als, it was still planned to fit it to the Tu-16R-1
chotographic equipment. The Tu- 1 6R was to be 26 hours 16 minutes. The flight test results once it became available. But tests wlth the
'eady for State acceptance trials in March 1955: yielded the following data: intended underwing pods showed that
The advanced development project of the increased drag caused some deterioration in
or 'aircraft 92' approved in November Empty weight 38,436k9 the aircraft's performance. lt was therefore
:nvisaged two versions: a daylight reconnais- Maximum take-otf weight 75,370k9 decided to accommodate the SRS-3 in the
l\,4aximum speed with TOW of 62,000k9 fuselage, the antenna being housed in a dorsal
sance version (Tu-16R) and a nocturnal recon-
^aissance version (Tu-16RN, razvedchik at an altitude of 6,200m 1 ,000-1,1 00km/h fairing. The urgent need for this long-range
'cchnoy). As most early Soviet ELINT and Service ceillng 1 2,400m reconnaissance aircraft led to plant No 1 at
-CM systems were not automated, the Tu-16R Time to an altitude oJ 10,000m: Kuibyshev producing the first five aircraft
:ad to have a special pressurised crew com- with an all-up weight of 62,000k9 15.1 mins equipped with the SRS-3 (designated Tu-16
.artment (similar to that on the Tu-16KS) for with an allup weight of 75,400k9 24,5 mins Romb) in 1956. ln production they were
:ieir operator, bringing the number of Operational range 6,300km referred to as 'order 261 ', and they are some-
:rewmembers to seven. The operator was to Take-off run 2,290-3,275n times called Tu-16R 'Romb' or simply Tu-16R.
:e given an ejector seat, but shared hls quar- There was, however, little reduction in drag and
::r's with some of the PR-1 (or 'Natriy') equip- Equipment changes were made in the course subsequent production examples had the
-ent and an air conditioning system. The of the tests. SRS-3 (Romb-1) ELINT equipment SRS-3 equipment housed in underwing pylon-
:.rtennas for the PR-1 (or 'Natriy') were housed was mounted in pods on pylons beneath the mounted pods as originally planned.
' fairings above and below the operator's posi- wings and an SPS-1AG set for detailed ELINT Later, all five of these aircraft were retrofitted
: cn as well as in dielectric blisters under the work installed in the fuselage. Delays in the with the SRS-1 ELINT system.
'-selage and wing centre section. lt was also flight tests and the late delivery of electronic
^iended to accommodate the SPS-3 Romb-1 equipment caused the State trials to be post- Tu-1 6R Reconnaissance Aircraft
-:lNT equipment in underwing pylon-mounted poned in accordance with CofM directive ('order 361', rzdeltye NR)
: cds. ln the aircraft's tail section an antenna for No 424-261 of 26th March 1 956 and MAP order ln 1957 plant No 1 produced 44Tu-16Rs and a
:re Sirena-2 radar warning receiver (RWR) was No 194 of 6th April; they took place between further 26 in 1958 with various reconnaissance
:r be fitted above the radome of the Argon gun- 1gth June and 17th August 1956, involving 27 equipment fits in accordance with the above-
:ying radar. The standard Rubidiy-MM-2 radar flights with 97 hours'total time. mentioned directive No1545-777. Of the total
.ras fitted with a special FA-PL-1 camera for The Tu-16R-1 became the prototype for the of 70 Tu-16R reconnaissance aircraft built on
:lotographing images on the radar screen. production Tu-1 6R. The production aircraft was the model of the Tu-16R-1 prototype (with

-con inclusion into the inventory the PR-1 jam- io have SRS-1AG and SRS-3 ELINT and SPS-1 pylon-mounted underwing pods for the SRS-3),
-er was designated SPS- 1 , SPS-2 and SPS-2K. and SPS-3 ECM equipment. ln contrast, the plant No 1 supplied the following variants:
The Tu-1 6R day reconnaissance version was prototype had only the SRS-IAG and four - 18 aircraft with SRS-1 (bands A, B & C) and SRS-6
:: be equipped with four AFA-33/75 or AFA-33/75M and AFA-33/100M cameras for - 1B aircraft wlth SRS-1 (bands D & E) and SRS-3
:FA-33/100 cameras on AKAFU pivoting twotfour-strip photography, for which special - 34 aircraft with the SRS-1 (bands D & E)
-ounts for daylight veftical photography in its apertures (with protective shutters) were cut in
:amera bay. An AFA-33/20 vertical camera was the equipment bay doors. The prototype also (Note: These are purely conventional designations
a so carried for 'opportunity en route' photog- had provision for twin NAFA-6/50 cameras for for wavebands whose frequencies are not known;
-:phy. Behind the forward pressurised cabin an night photography at the rear paft of the equip- this should not be confused with the familiar terms
:FA-33/75 for oblique photography was pro- ment bay and an aperture on the pori side of such as 'J-band' or'S-band'.)
, ced with a rectangular camera window on the the fuselage for an AFA-33M/75 oblique cam-
:lrt side. The night reconnaissance version era. Although underwing pylons were fitted for Examples with the SRS-3 were given the pro-
.,, as to carry two NAFA-6/50 night cameras and the SRS-3 pods, the pods were not fitted as duction designation 'order 361' and were
6 flare bombs. Both versions had provision for there were problems with the SRS-3 which pre- known in service as izdeliye NR. The equip-

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's
communications 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//

ment ba-vs :l's:::-e ASO-16 Avtomat-1 and

ASO-28 r.:: - :^a: : spensers ln service
the Tu-:€3 ::- I :a'-,.'3'e of four sets of cam-
Vld),v3-= - -- -lss on.
-:-: a'a:- a?'=' ihe Tu-16R was Pro-
cuce: -:,',: ,:-::-s '3'cay and night Pho-
IOO-a:-, v , =' -: := ! ae life more modern
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:

i c0okm/h
6 300km
610 x 13km

::'ia- ,',:- underwing SRS-3

:- :-= '.:-C reporting name
a::a' --: - -.':= ;, :hout underwing
:::: ,' - :: :-: 3=:ger-E

tt, l l:i

60 Tupolev Tu-16
Tu-1 6R-2 Experimental Reconnaissance
Aircraft ('order 455')
On 11th June 1956 the Council of Ministers
ssued directive NoTBB-437 followed by MAP
crder No343 on 23rd June. They required the
Tupolev 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 November
i956, but the prototype of the new version
Cesignated 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 from
io the GK Nll WS base at Chkalovskaya AB
rear Moscow, but problems with the camera
system delayed the checkout trials. These
eventually took place between 20th August
i95B and 23rd February 1959. Series produc-
iion, however, was not recommended - again
Cue to problems with the cameras installed;
coded '50 Red', the Tu-16R-2 finally ended up
as an exhibit at the Soviet (now Russian) Air
Force 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 Aircraft

Some Tu-16Rs had their SRS-1 ELINT equip- .,,{M*.]llir',ii$ffisiis

rnent replaced by the SPS-2 ECM set. The rest

of the equipment was unchanged, but the air-
$-ffi # ks,,"-
craft designated Tu-1 6RE.

Top left: The port pod ol the SRS-3 Bomb-1 SIGINT

system under the wing of a Tu-16R undergoing
refurbishment in Khabarovsk. Yuriy Kabernik

(cln 1Aa242O) equipped with

Top right: A Tu-16R
the SRS.3 system undergoes maintenance.
Yelim Gordon archive

Upper right: Air-to-air shot ol SRS.3 equipped

Tu-l6R c/n 1883215. Yefim Gordon archive

Lower right: Seen just before touchdown, this

Tu-16R appears to have diflerenlly coloured port
and starboard SRS-3 pods. Yefim Gordon archive

Right: The Tu-l6R-2 on display at the Soviet Air

Force Museum in Monino. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-1 6 bt
Tu-16R(ZA) '20 Red' (c n 1883408) combines the
ventral blister ol the SRS-4 SIGINT system with
the SRS-3 Romb-1 SIGINT Pods. Jane's Allthe

Tu-l6R'29 Red' (c n 1S43511) equipped with the

SRS-1 and SRS-4 was tie first reconnaissance-
configured Tu-16 to feeture an SPS-100M Mal'va
jammer in a UKhO fairing rePlacing the tail
turrel Recod€d 'O4 Red'. it was later preserved
at 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'4

SIGIXT gear teatures a smaller rear ECM fairing
housing 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 aircraft

combining lr€ :CU slae of the previous aircraft
witir SRS3 urEie{lF€ oods- ':'- Gcrdon archtve

Tu-16RR ZA 2: 3.;E e n 1883i105) shows the

pylon-{-rouniE€ air samPling pods.
Seen fro,r: }"{ae,a: ta€ r1ng of Tu'16 c/n
620300g 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 thimble
fairing on t5e rEsc arxd E]e arTtennas under the
air intal(er ':'- l: :r- 1-:- .:

:ddlEli*+* 1s*

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 Reconnaissance

Aircraft ('order 2694')
j^ 22nd November 1967 the Council of Mlnis-
':'sissued directive No 1081-370 requlring the
I {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 3**
:..stem were carried out successfully between
l: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 i lir
, i.'i;

-:derground nuclear weapons testing pro-
l'ammes. Each of these flights counted as an ""
*,,.; I ;i,,h
: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 ltlt^
:^e more sophisticated AFA-41120, AFA-42120,
:,trA-42175, AFA-421100 and NAFA-MK-75 cam-
::as, the SRS-4 Kvadrat ELINT set and the
iBP-4 radar gave place to the Rubin-1 K which
-ad better target resolution. The SRS-1 and
SRS-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.

Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft
The need for a more specialised maritime
'econnaissance version of the Tu- 1 6R arose in vision of Tupolev's OKB-1 56. The movable mis- pressurised cabin. Conventional AFA-33/20M
:re late1950s and early 1960s, and a spin-off sile pylon and launch equipment was removed, (vertical) and AFA-42175 (oblique) cameras
cf the Tu-16K-10 ASM carrier was chosen as the weapons bay faired over and a specialised were also carried, and some Tu-16RM-1s car-
:he most suitable option for Naval Air Arm YeN-R radar installed in the nose (it was out- ried SPS-1 and SPS-2 ECM sets. The maritime
aeeds. Two examples of the Tu-16K-10 nearing wardly distinguishable from the YeN by the reconnaissance version was accepted for ser-
:he end of their service lives were chosen for slightly enlarged chin radome). Three ventral vice in the early 1960s; since series production
oonversion as the Tu-16RM-1 prototypes teardrop antenna fairings were provided for the of the Tu-16 ended in 1963 and no new-build
trazvedchik morskoy - reconnaissance air- SRS-1 (forward and aft) and the SRS-4 (central aircraft were available, 11 (12, according to
craft, naval), the work being carried out by the and slightly larger than the other two). The some sources) Tu-16K-10s were converted to
Navy's maintenance services under the super- ELINT system was operated from a ventral Tu-1 6RM- 1 configuration.

TupolevTu-16 63
This air-to-air shot of Tu'l6RR (ZA) cln 1883305
at a later date, now upgraded with additional
ELINT/ECM equipment, repainted and recoded
'28 Red', shows the starboard RR831 1-100 air
sampling pod in action. The movable nosecone
is retracted and the rear shutter turned through
90", enabling an unrestricted airflow; compare
with the inactive pod on the port wing station.
Note also the refuelling receptacle under the
port wingtip. Jane s All rhe Waild s Atrcraft

A number of Tu-16K'10s were converted to

Tu-16RM-1 and Tu-16RM'2 maritime recce
aircraft: '89 Red' is one of them. This view
clearly shows the ventral blister radomes, the
enlarged chin radome and dorsal blade aerial.
Jal]g S /lii i!',a t,','ar a S A raral



, :. il',:;1:l
n: ,r r.ll'ir'




An upper view of the same Tu'16RM'1 or Tu-I68M-2 cruising over thick 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
used to be an IFR-capable Tu'1 6K'10(ZA). Jane's All the Wotld's Aircraft

64 Tupolev Tu'16
A Tu-16RM.1 or Tu-16RM-2 coded'84 Black'
formates with a Tu-I6(2) tanker, ready to take
on fuel. Yefim Gordon archive

Below and bottom: A Tu-16SPS ECM aircraft. This

version can be discerned from the SRS-1/SRS-4
equipped Tu-l 6R by the equal size of the ventral
dielectric blisters. Jane's All the World's Aircraft

Aside from reconnaissance, the Tu-16RM-1 i,li!i: ;

could provide mid-course guidance for K-10 t::ri, i,!i)tt!1,

ASMs launched by Tu-16K'10 and Tu-16K-10-

26 aircraft. This version had the NATO code-
:lame Badger-D.

Maritime Reconnaissance Aircraft Tu-16SPS EGM Aircraft Production of Tu-16s fitted with the SPS-1
-welve (or eleven) Tu-16K-1ODs were also mod- The first SPS-I and SPS-2 active ECM sets and SPS-2 jammers began in 1955. During
'ed as maritime reconnaissance aircraft. They installed in the Tu-16 in the 1950s were 1955-56 plant No'1 in Kuibyshev produced 42
,'rere conveded to carry the same equipment as designed for group protection of strike aircraft aircraft with SPS-1 sets, plus another 102
:re Tu- 1 6RM-1 but designated Tu-1 6RM-2. formations and were relatively unsophisticated, machines with the SPS-2 in 1955-57, including
with low emission power; besides, they were four IFR-equipped examples.
6RTs Experimental Maritime
Tu-1 bulky and heavy. Basically, they were intended Like the Tu-16R, this version designated
Reconnaissance / OTH Targeting Aircraft to jam AA artillery, land, shipborne and air- Tu-165PS (stahntsiya pomekhovykh signalav
r 1956 OKB-52 headed by Vladimir N Chelomey borne radars produced in the 1940s. The = active jammer) had a removable pressurised
:egan preliminary design studies for the P-6 SPS-1 and SPS-2 required an additional compartment in the aft part of the bomb bay for
:.ore-launched anti-shipping cruise missile, lt crewmember to operate them who had first to the electronic warfare officer (EWO), the for
:cpeared in 1962/63, successfully passing its detect the enemy radar, establish its frequency ward section still remaining usable as a bomb
::ate trials, and was accepted for use with Pro- and then tune his ECM set accordingly. All this bay. The two antennas for the SPS-2, covered
:ct651 and 675 submarines. The P-6 could be could take a well{rained operator three min- by teardrop fairings, were housed in the lower
=rnched while the submarine was submerged. utes - too long if the aircraft was flying at low part of the fuselage fore and aft of the bomb
,','crk proceeded in parallel on an airborne target altitude. Added to this was the inability of the bay. The whip aerials for the SPS-1 could be
:3tection and over-the-horizon (OTH) targeting SPS-1 and SPS-2 to jam multi-channel and sited either dorsally (aft of the WSO's blister)
:,'stem able to transmit target data directly to tuneable radars effectively. or ventrally (forward of the bomb bay). Aircraft
'-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
,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 role.

*,, **'s*a*lrg&,*+.ffirn


Tupolev Tu-16 65

:::.: '13 3ac c r :641602). a standard Tu-l6P

Buket ECll a r:=ii ':'- ::':3:l archive

-": '?0 Rec c:13€?s5). aTu-!6SPS'

l--:- ;- T'rrs Fuo,licrtYshotof aSovietAir

Forc€ cre'r cosing ri"tfr their Tu'15P Buket
illusffies 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

'dh+' 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'

fitted with the SPS-1 and SPS-2 were desig- Tu-16P EGM Aircraft (izdeliYe NPI a-: :. ::-: -::-: :' :.'ercoming ECM were
The Buket system of automated active jammers -:-:::,: -= --a".2 - :s:unction, the enemy
nated Tu- 1 65PS - or sometimes Tu-1 6P.
was developed in the late 1950s Unlike the '?=='.. -: :-, :-e-:: :s ooeratingfrequency,
At first the Tu-16SPS was not equipped with
the ASO-1 6 chaff dispenser, and the absence SPS-1 and SPS-2, these new sets could functicn :-: :.s- '--:- ---:-: ,',:'e four Buket systems,
of chaff vents in the bomb bay doors distin- automatically and jam several radars, including :a:- .1 :- :: :,',- ':^:e of frequencies: B-2
guished it from the later Tu-16E. Later, how- multi-channel and tuneable radars, simultane- 2' :-:::- ,',:.::^:.- B'3(12.5-21 Scm), B-4
ously. The system comprised the SPS-22. 9 3-'2 3:- =-: :-j 8 6-9.8cm).
ever, chaff dispensers were fitted to the
SPS-33, SPS-44 and SPS-55 sets, each ofwhich s,.s::- -:: :our generating transmit-
Tu-1 6SPS and the difference disappeared' =::^
During the 1960s, almost all the Tu-16SPS siill could cover a certain waveband. ln its day the :e's ,',:- r-:-:-: ,',ar,'elengths (except the
Buket was the world's most powerful ECM suite. Buite:-3 ,', - :^ -:l s x . enabling it to cover the
in service were refitted with the Buket ECM set'

--'* T

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 11ryr'fl ,*!ri,
:rewmember was not required, and they could
oe 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 were
ntended to counteract enemy long-range
3round detection and guidance radars and sur-
:aceto-air missile (SAM) sites. From an altitude
cf 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 lairing

housing the SPS-1OO Rezeda active iammer.
The small dielectric blisters conceal the actual
emitter antennas. Tupolev JSC

Top right: The same fairing opened for

maintenance, showing the equipment rack ot
the SPS-I00 and the emitter antennas which
are positioned under the dielectric blisters
on the fairing. Tupolev JSC

This Tu-l6P ('94 Red', c/n 5202602) was

converted 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 ECM
antennas on the forward and centre fuselage.
Note that the tactical code is painted twice on
the nose gear doors. Yelim Gordon archive

Front view ol Tu-l5P c/n 1881305.

Yefim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-1 6 67
The Buket suite was first fitted to the Tu-16 in
1 962. ln the course of the 1 960s, 34 aircraft
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
r 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

r'w** 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

i; ;il larger ventral canoe fairing. This is '80 Red'
;*Jtr*:Ad Gl n A2O4212)' Yuriy Kabernik archive

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 Experimental
ECM 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 ol
development work. Note that the fin torsion
cox is outlined in white. Tupolev JSC



Tupolev Tu-16 69
,li I tiitl

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
l- combai a-c sa=a a
jsec versions of the Tu- 16
were f,::c ,',:: :'e Rezeda-AK lrom 1969
onv/arcs. i^e 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'

;Jl$,,r' Experimental ECM Aircraft
Acicrc r: :c Cc-rorl cf Ministers directive
No1659-657 3'3:l JJiv 1953 and MOP order
Niarc. -i . :-- r, 'he Silrkat ECM set
I\U J4
deslgr:ec ':: .a--r'9 ground and shipborne
radais ,'.c:i ^: ^ :^e 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: svs:grn was installed some-
vrhai ra:e' N=:^=- s!'s:em was placed in series
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
Centre: Very weathered-looking Tu-16 Yolka
Top left:'19 Red', the prototype of the Tu-l6 -- chaff bY a sPeciai cover.
vott<a EClvt aircraft, showing the ventral chaff '09 Red' (c/n 188230G). Yefim Gordon archive
When the ASO-1 6 chaff dispensers were not
outlets. The aircraft is additionally equipped
Above: Tu-l6 Yolka'53 Red'flies over the installed ihe entire bay was available for carry-
with an SPS-100 active iammer' Tupolev JSC
Russian countryside, with three sister ships ing bombs. but in the 1950s the seven ASO-16s
cruising at a lower level. Yefim Gordon archive *.r" by two APP-22 chaff dis-
Top right: Close-up of the chaff outlets
characterising the Tu-16 Yolka' "rg..nted
pensers (avtomaht postanovki pomekh - auto-
Viktor KudrYavtsev archive

70 Tu1olevTu-16

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 small
rernispherical ventral blisters) ahead ol the
rain gear and the dorsal intakes and outlets
:if the Azaliya jammer's heat exchangers).
t is equipped with a UKhO tail lairing housing
r 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
. :'sionby 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 configuration
apossessing 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 or
SPS-2K jammer (the latter model was called
tron - Peony) with its antenna mounted under
:re operator's cabin. The cabin (similar to that
'ited in the Tu-16R) had life-suppoft systems
and control mechanisms for the ECM set. The
ocmb bay also featured mounting racks for two
ASO-16 chaff dispensers. Bombs could be car-
:ied in the forward section of the bomb bay.
-ater, additional ASO-16 chaff dispensers were
roused in the forward section, as well as two
APP-22 chaff dispensers, with appropriate
rnodifications to the bomb bay doors; this
greatly improved the aircraft's ECM capability
at the expense of the offensive armament.
Between 1957 and 1959, 51 examples ofthe
Tu-16E were produced at plant No1; another
38 were built by plant No22 in 1958. All pos-
sessed lFFl capability. The Tu-16E differed
externally from the Tu-16 Yolka in having an
access hatch for the EWO's cabin cut in the
bomb bay doors. The Tu-16E was given the
NATO codename Badger-H.

Tupolev Tu-1 6 71
A head-on view of Tu-l6E Azaliya'69 Red'
GlnA2O4214), YeJim Gordon archive

Tu-l6E Azaliya'23 Blue'takes off on a training

mission. 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 aviapolk
rahdioelektronnovo 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
Tu-16E Azaliya EGM Aircraft forward section of the weapons bay; on the the aircraft were fitted with the Rogovitsa
During the 1970s a number of Tu- 1 6 Yolka and replaced the entry hatch of the EWO's
Tu-1 6E it (Cornea) and SPS-152 jammers with the anten-
Tu-16E ECM aircraft were modified rn slfu to cabin (which was removed). nas mounted in a small thimble fairing on the
caffy SPS-61, SPS-62, SPS-63, SPS-64, Some examples of the Tu-16 Yolka and navigator's station glazing.
SP5-65 or SPS-66 jammers which had the com- Tu-16E Azaliya had active jammers of ihe
mon name Azaliya (Azalea); such aircraft were SPS-100, SPS-100A and SPS-100M type, and Tu-16P with RPZ-59 ECM Rockets
accordingly known as the Tu-16E Azaliya. As a at least some had the SPO-15 Beryoza On 21st July 1959 the Council of Ministers
rule, the SPS-63 or SPS-66 was f itted. Many also RHAWS. During their service life the aircraft issued directive No832-372 envisaging provi-
had jammers of the Siren' family fitted. were constantly modified and updated in line sion of a new individual passive ECM system
According to MAP order No 121 of 1gth April with other versions of the Tu-16. for the Tu-16. Toropov's OKB-134 therefore
1972Ihe Tu-16E had its DK-7 tail turret, PRS-1 modified its production K-5 (alias K-51) air-to-
Argon gun ranging radar, ASO-1 6 chaff dis- Tu-16ER Reconnaissance and air missile as the RPZ-59 (raketa protivorahdi-
penser. SPO-2 RWR and SPS-2 jammer ECM Aircraft olokatsionnoy zashchity - anti-radar protection
removed. These were replaced by one of the Some Tu-16Es were re-equipped as the missile) known under the codename
Azaliya-U series jammers, an SPS-I51 Siren'-1 Tu-16ER, which had the SPS-2 ECM set Avtostrada-l (Highway-1). Rather mislead-
jammer, an SPS-151M Siren'-1 M jammer, two replaced by an SRS-1 ELINT system. This ver- ingly, the weapon was referred to in Russian as
SPS-152 Siren'-2 jammers, two SPS-153 sion had a distinctive appearance wiih its whip an 'anti-radar missile'; however, it was not an
Siren'-3 jammers, a Beryoza-P (Birch-P) radar antennas for the SPS-1 and SRS-1 sets. ARM - that is, it was designed to disrupt the
homing and warning system (RHAWS) and an operation of enemy radars, not destroy them
ASO-21 chaff/f lare disPenser Tu'16E (Tu-16E-KhR) The RPZ-59 was to be fired by the Tu-16, eject-
The Siren' sets were installed in the familiar NBC Reconnaissance Aircraft ing clouds of chaff some way ahead of the air-
UKhO conical fairlng replacing the tail turret. Yet another ECM version is officially referred to craft to jam AA artillery gun-laying radars, SAM
Aircraft with the SPS-61, SPS-62 and SPS-63 as the Tu-16E, but more commonly as the guidance radars and radar homing air-to-air
also carried an SPS-6 Los' (Elk) jammer for col- Tu-16E-KhR (khimicheskaya raztedka). lts missiles. Six RPZ-59 rockets were to be carried
lective protection, while those with the SPS-64, equipment fit permitted photographic, elec- on a special extensible launcher lowered clear
SPS-65 and SPS-66 had the SPS-S Fasol' tronic and nuclear/biological/chemical (NBC) of the weapons bay for loading and firing them;
(String Bean). The antennas for the Azaliya reconnaissance, and it closely resembled the the launcher featured an emergency jettison
were housed in teardrop fairings under the Tu-16RR. lts ECM equipment merely facilitated system. The missiles could be fired singly, or
fuselage in the forward or aft section of the its reconnaissance functions. A crew of seven automatically at preset intervals.
bomb bay, the remainder of the bay being used was carried. After preliminary factory testing of the sys-
to carry bombs or ASO-16 and APP-22 chaff The forward section of the equipment bay tem at OKB-134, combined state trials involving
dispensers. When the Azaliya was installed on accommodated a pivoting platform on which OKB-134, OKB-156 and the Soviet Air Force
the Tu-16 Yolka, the antenna was located in the two AFA-42/100 cameras were mounted, and were held by GK Nll WS, using a modified

Tupolev Tu-1 6
Tu.16P'12 Red'(c/n 6400903) was modified by
Nll-131 fortesting the RPZ-59 rockets.

Tu-16P c/n 6400903, showing the underwing racks

for the RPZ-s9 chaff-dispensing rockels. The
purpose of the small lairings under the wingtips
is unknown. Bolh Tupolev JSC

Tu-l6P ('47 Red', c/n 8204130) built in 1958 at

3lant 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 augmented
cy 12 RPZ-59 rockets carried on underwing
:ylons (hence the name). A Voronezh-built
fu-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 & Production Before firing the missiles the crew of the was installed, and several machines had the
Association) and then the Leninets Holding Co. Tu-16 had to on put oxygen masks and protec- SPS-4M Modulyatsiya jammer fitted under the
=urther trials were held on this aircraft between tive goggles and keep them on untilthe aircraft terms of 'order 2615'.
September 1968 and May 1969, using an had passed the cloud of chaff. With the missiles The introduction of infra-red seekers on sur-
'nproved version of the RPZ-59. The aircraft expended, the centre of gravity shifted forward face-to-air and air-to-air missiles and the expe-
3gged 39 hours 49 minutes in 19 test flights by 0.5% mean aerodynamic chord; therefore, rience gained in local wars compelled the
rvolving ground radars and the Smerch-A to maintain a safe CG position after firing the installation of infra-red countermeasures (IRCM)
Tornado-A) fire control radar fitted to the missiles the Tu-16 had to land with a fuel load equipment on some versions of the Tu-16,
',likoyan/Gurevich Ye-1 55P experimental inter- of at least 2,000k9. including the Tu-16P. These aircraft had ASO-
.eptor. The tests proved successful and the 2l7ER challlllare dispensers in the rear portions
rilon system was adopted for service use with The overall number of Tu-16 versions, includ- of the main gear fairings and in the rear fuselage,
:he Tu-16P. ing the Tu-16P, is remarkable for the numerous
Frcm 1972 onwards a small number of ECM combinations and types of ECM equipment fit-
aircraft were adapted to carry the RPZ-59. ted. For example, the 226th lndependent ECM the RPZ-59 rockets were
Below left: This is how
loaded by means ol hand-driven hoists.
lxternally these differed from the standard Air Regiment based at Poltava had 30 Tu-16s
Tu-16P in having two underwing hardpolnts, with active ECM equipment, and no two were Below right: This photo shows well the design of
each carrying six missiles in tandem groups of identical. The new improved Klyukva (Cran- the unusual twin-row six-round launchets.
:nree. Each missile weighed around 1,000k9. berry) ECM set with improved performance Both Tupolev JSC
----- .._
*-*U t,trt

Tupolev Tu-1 6
Chapter Six

Other Versions and Testbeds

TARGET DRONE CARRIERS Tu-16KRME ('order 299E') 4C:::- --: 3--:- ,',: ort of both drones
A variant of the Tu-16E ECM aircraft adapted to ',',3s j j:i.: .' -- : a--:^ altitude between
Tu-16KRM ('order 299') carry MV-1 target drones but retaining its 5C::-: -::- --:,. ,',::eabletocarryaddi-
To assist the Air Defence Force (PVO - Pro- SPS-1/SPS-2/Siren' jammers and ASO-16 ic^: ::- :-:-: ::-:- ^ s ngle items or as a
tivovozdooshnaya oborona) in the develop- chaff dispenser was designated Tu-16KRME. se: ':- -:::-' -: :-: :'a ectorY, transmitting
ment of missiles for use against high{lying When the drones were launched, the aircraft ca:::: -=::-' - -: ::a: :-S .''ia data Iink, fecofd-
supersonic aircraft, production Tu-16KS and could simulate enemy ECM against the PVO s '= z -:: :. :- ?:::' ^c nissile and auto-
Tu-16KSR ASM carriers were modified under SAM complexes. Like the Tu-16E, it had a crew -=a -U , :::::: -l:-: a.j-lCh reSUltS.
the terms of 'order 299' in the late 1960s and of seven. --: ^:=-:r,r,' l-:'.',1 Crones were carried
given the service designation Tu-16KRM. They c-, :-. ---'i'.',' -::':i from a Tu-16K-26
carried two MV-1 supersonic high-altitude tar- Tu-16NKRM ('order 332') - ss : -::' .: The modifications
get drones (MV = mlshen' vysotnaya), alias Appearing in 1964, the Tu-16NKRM known as ': -::: ::':-::^:-:1,', rgs. alterationsto the
'order 332' in production, carried two 540-kg ' a= :::"='. -: :. s:=- :ianges in the fuel SyS-
KRM-2 (krylahtaya raketa-mlshen' - cruise
missile used as target), on underwing pylons. high-speed, high-altitude lTs-59 O/en' (Deer) :a- :-: ::.:::-':-:'essurising the drone
The drones were used in the development of drones (lTs = i mitahtor tsell - simulated targel) aa-a=.-=-,. --: iSR-5NM was launched at
the Tu-1285-4 long-range air defence system powered by liquid{uel rocket motors. ln 1980 a- : : :,:: -' :5 --::lir r lvhilethe carrierwas
comprising the Tu-128 heavy interceptor and the improved 1,052-kg lTs-59V Magnit (Mag- : ; -: :i :::-:::-- - Tie Coweredflighttime
the R-4R and R-4T air-to-air missiles. net) with a liquid{uel cruise engine and hvc :':^: :':-= ,',:: :::,',4:^ 75.7 and 379.4 sec-
The MV-1 was a derivative of the KRS-2 solidjuel rocket boosters became available. 3-:s :.:- 7-.-'---'ange of 110.4km. The
cruise missile with a top speed of 2,760kmlh at Both drones were used by the PVO for SA\4 a-:-:s :: - : a :: aa iaunched bY suitablY
an altitude of 22,500m and a maximum range development and troop training, -:: ':: ---'ai-26s Tu-16KSR-2-5s and
of 376km. lt was flown at altitudes between
20,000 and 25,000m with a flight time of 7.2 Tu-16NM
minutes and weighed 4,000k9 at launch. The KSR-SNM (D-sNM; M = mlshen') anc The Tu-16 Target Tug
The modifications on the Tu-16KRM KSR-SMV (D-SMV) target drones were evolvec --. ---'i ,',as : s: -sed by the PVO as a tug
included changes to the flap operating system by MKB Raduga ('Rainbow' Moscow Design
(flap deflection was restricted when the drones Bureau, pronounced rahdooga) from the i-,-s'.-.,2 - shen - glrding target). The tail
were carried) and strengthening of the wing KSR-sN low-altitude cruise missile in the early :u"e:.',as -:'s 's:ance. replaced bythetow-
spars. There were certain alterations to the fuel 1990s. Both drones simulated air-to-surface ,1C 334-
system and special equipment to effect the and anti-shipping air-launched missiles anc
launch of the drones was fitted. The original were used in the development of new SAM sys-
RBP-4 radar was retained. tems. The drones could be programmed to RADIO.CONTROLLED DRONES
simulate high-altitude missiles, strategic or tac-
tical bombers or low-altitude missiles. Depend- ln 19c6 OKB-'aO ,,'ras called upon to provide a
A Tu-16 configured as a drone launcher comes radio-con::cltei versicn of the Tu-16 for the
ing on the programme, the drone could have a
in to land, showing the two target drones
top speed of Mach 4.2, a maximum range of PVO. On 23'c Ncvernber 1956 the Council of
looking like large bombs carried on underwing
pylons, Yefim Gordon archive 400km and a maximum flight altitude ol 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 second
quarter 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 probe
s-: 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 struts -13-?so,
rcgr lhe outer wings; these carry marker
";r:s making the aircraft observable at night.
;&e- f#*
. - 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
"'itlgeTl-i '-e, ,*-'..*.fl,*il$ ,:61fu;*_ .,g* t=F;
drones to its Tomilino branch headed by -q
= \ezval',
-re PVO required the Tu-16M to be con- ; F'F* %*.t* 4s !

'': 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- modified from Tu-16 aircraft at plant No22 in remaining, allowing them to be used as trainers
3 with Lll, however, devised a system Kazan'. for a while.
:^abling the Tu-16M to take off and land under The demand for the drones was small at f irst, Regardless of the original version, the M-16
-:tio control. The Tu-16M also differed from with only the Kazan' factory carrying out the drones could be identified by the forward- and
::1er types of target drones converted from air- modifications in parallel with series production aft-pointing probe aerials of the command link
:'aft in being able to accommodate a large of the supersonic fu-22 and later fu-22M
:':ount of ECM equipment. bombers, but the early 1980s saw the en masse Below left: This M-16-3 (also converted from an
After further development work, the Tu-16M retirement of the Tu-1 6 and the re-equipment of aircraft with individual protection ECM
::'get drone was accepted for use on 17th April the Long-Range Aviation with the Tu-22M. As equipment) has a dilferent undernose antenna
'965 under the designation M-16. By then a the volume of conversion work grew, the drone and camera pods carried on V-struts iust
outboard of the main gear fairings to record
:cnsiderable number of Tu-16s were reaching modification job was taken on by the Air
missile attacks. Yuriy Kabernik archive
:re end of their service lives and were modified Force's aircraft overhaul plant (ARZ - aviare-
:s M-16 drones. For a brief period the designa- montnw zavod) No 12 in Khabarovsk. The air- Below right: Close-up of the forward fuselage of
: cn Tu-16M was only applied to those drones craft converted there still had some airframe life M-l6'51 Red' (c/n 1882216). Yuriy Kabernik

Tupolev Tu-16
sysiem on the nose and tail. Some aircraft had

I 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'
ha 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
# * # E $'-"q # Vladimirovka AB in Akhtoobinsk, southern Rus-
*'ffi- 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 one
piece 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

fr*r control mode.

Tu-16M (M-16) Target Drone

('order 212','order 2212', izdeliye NMI
Tu-16s converted at the Kazan' plant No22
were initially known by the service designation
I Tu-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 the

one-off M-16 Orbita drone. lt displays the
dished lairing mounting the rear probe aerials
ol the radio control system which supplants
the tail turret, the angular dielectric lairings
replacing the dorsal and ventral turrets, and
the bory fairings low on the aft fuselage sides
which house automatic chaff dispensers.
Yuriy Kabernik archive

This close-up shows to advantage the typical

rear end treatment of an M-'16 target drone.
Yefim Gordon

M-16-3'77 Red' (c/n 82O42O3) pictured at

Vladimirovka AB in Akhtoobinsk, the seat of GK
Nll WS, is a converted Tu-l6E Azaliya ECM
aircraft, as revealed by the dorsal heat
exchanger air intakes and outletsi so is M-l6'3
'90 Red' (c/n 8204108) parked alongside. These
aircraft were previously coded'90 Red'and '23
Red' respectively. Ot note are the Mikoyan/
Gurevich MiG-21 fighters in the background
earmarked lor conversion to M.21 target drones
and the Antonov An-124-100 Ruslan transport ot
Volga Dnepr Airlines which probably delivered
them to the base. Yelim Gordon

fupolev Tu-1 6
lhe tail of M-16-3'77 Red' (c/n A2O42O3), during conversion as 'order 254 Orbita'). lt dif- limitation treaties meant that examples retired
-<howing the rear UKhO ECM fairing which now fered from the other drone conversions in hav- from operational service could, with armament,
iounts the aft pair of radio control system
ing additional antennas replacing the dorsal ECM and other miscellaneous items of equip-
srobe aerials. Yefim Gordon
and ventral gun positions and boxy pods cov- ment removed, be used for crew training as the
ering automatic passive ECM on the lower rear Tu-1 6U (o oc h ebnyy ls am oly otl - trai ner). Vari-
M-16-1 Target Drone fuselage sides. This version did not pass its ous versions of the Tu-16U bomber trainer,
- Khabarovsk various versions of the Tu-16 State trials, so no more were converted. which was to be outwardly distinguished by a
-:derwent conversion into drones. Tu-164 red band round the fuselage forward of the tail
:cmber conversions with Siren' ECM sets were M-16 Target Drone ('order 285K') assembly, were planned.
:esignated M-16-1 . An unconventional version of the target drone The Tu-l6U-1 was to be a dedicated flying
was developed under the aegis of the Air training version for mastering piloting and nav-
M-16-2 Target Drone Defence Force and converted in 1991 under igation techniques, the Tu-16U-2 used for
-nose Tu-16 drones fitted with Siren' active the terms of 'order 2B5K'. lt was given a three- bombing training, the Tu-1 6U-3 for ASM launch
_ammers covering the forward and rear hemi- year service life extension and used to carry tar- training, while the Tu-16U-4 was to be a training
spheres were designated M-16-2. These con- get drones until it reached the end of its service version of the Tu-16K-10-26. For political rea-
. ersions were mainly carried out in Khabarovsk life when it became a target itself . Outwardly the sons none of these versions actually materi-
and based on Tu-164 bombers and Tu-16E aircraft could be recognised by the trapezoidal alised: firstly, the Tu-16 fell outside the strategic
=CM versions which had an UKhO ECM fairing. command link aerials at the wingtips. The can- weapons category; secondly, many examples of
non armament was retained and the crew com- the Tu- 1 6 were already being converted as M-1 6
The M-16-3 Target Drone ('order 254') prised six persons. drones. lt was decided, therefore, to combine
Some drones had the Siren' jammer covering two functions in the M-16: bomber trainer and
cnly the forward hemisphere and were desig- target drone. For that reason the M-16 drones
nated M-16-3. Various versions of the Tu-16, OTHER VERSIONS AND TESTBEDS which underwent conversion in Khabarovsk
rncluding those fitted with ihe Azaliya, Buket and had major overhauls to give them three more
Ficus ECM systems, underwent this conversion Tu-16U Bomber Trainer (project) years of service life. This permitted them to be
at ARZ No 12 under the terms of 'order 254'. As the standard bomber in the Long-Range Avi- used as training aircraft for some considerable
ation (DA) and Naval AirArm (AVMF), the Tu-16 time. As for the training roles described above,
M-16K Target Drone ('order 254K') was also used to train aircrews. The bomber they were assigned to the Tu-95U and Tu-95KU -
Drones converted at Khabarovsk from 'glass- was on strength with the training regiments at decommissioned versions of theTu-95A bomber
nosed' missile-carrying versions of the Tu-16 the Tambov Military Pilot College, the and Tu-95K missile strike aircraft.
with forward-looking Siren' jammers, as on the Chelyabinsk Military Navigator College, the
M-16-3, were known as 'order 254K' during DA's 43rd Combat & Conversion Training Cen- Tu-l6 Development Aircraft with
conversion and as the M-16K in service. The tre at Dyaghilevo AB, Ryazan', and the AVMF's RD-3MR Engines and'Hushkit'
missile pylons were not removed. 33rd Combat & Conversion Training Centre at Between 1957 and 1959 the Flight Research
Kool'bakino AB, Nikolayev. At first machines of lnstitute (Lll) carried out ground and flight tests
M-16 Orbita Target Drone the first production batches were relegated for of Tu-16 c/n 1BB2B0B fitted with new RD-3MR
('order 254 Orbita') training, but they were joined later by examples engines featuring thrust reversers (hence the R
ln 1990 a single retired Tu-16 ('32 Red', c/n of the Tu-164 bomber and even, in small num- for reyers tyagl. fhe new feature reduced the
7203616) was converted into the M-16 Orbita bers, by the 'Tu-16K-something-orother' mis- landing run by some 30-35% (from 1,500 to
(Orblt) experimental target drone (referred to siletoting versions. The signing of arms 950m). At the same time the engines were

TupolevTu-16 77
Tu-'16 Aerial Cinernatography Version
Two exa-: =s :' :-: ---i6K-10 were con-
fcr' - -: --: -_ :^: a : during testing and
develoc:-:-: :' :-: --' ;r: refuelling system.
,Arl ^-:-- :::- - :-:- ,,, ih the fOfmef miS-
r,r v9u s

ca":": : :: -=-:'=3 and remote-con-

sile .1

trollec ::-:-a: :. special mounts

reola::: :-: :: -:: :- : :a :Jrrets. Both aircraft
servec':' : :--: : -. ^ 1-umber of flighttest
prcg'a- s

Tu-16 Weapons Testbed with a DK-20

Tail Turret
T;- -- - .-
-":'. :' - s;ngle Tu-16 was
rec::3::, I l. -L- -,'. ^-cannon tail turret
.2 . -',^ g evaluation flight
:. S::
prone to exhaust gas ingestion and surging, command posts (ABCPs) able to fly at high alti-
which led to the eventual abandonment of tude and cover a wide radius, as well as accom- Tu-1 6 Tsiklon-N Tr/eather Research
these tests. ln 1961 the same Tu-16 was used panying the missile for some time, were cleariy Aircraft ('order 386')
to test noise-suppression engine nozzles (or, to preferable to ground installations; therefore a .^'.'= 2=-. -
:--: a- of aircraft, includ-
use a commercial aviation term, a 'hushkit'). few Tu-16s were suitably converted. The -J = ---- :-:: :- --'31 ard two An-12BPs,
The new nozzles were not adopted, however, Tu-16KP (komahndnyy poonkt - command ,'.:': -: : =:: -: - -:: - :^e Tsiklon (CYclone)
due to increased fuel consumption. post) carried the special missile control equic- 3-::-:--: -:- ::-:Sa-3rrC reSeafCh and
ment in the equipment compartment and in the : : -:-:::: -: - ^ -:- :-: A-SOiCeS Of the Cen-
Tu-16KP (Tu-16RT) bomb bay, with the operator's pressurised '.'a :a':- .::-' l:::-,a:cry (TsAO - Isen-
Airborne Command Post cabin in the aft section of the bomb bay. as cn trahl' 1.
= ==',
: g. ch
:'.i' 2 observatoriya)' a
ln the late 1950s Semyon A Lavochkin's OKB the Tu-16R. These specially converted exarn- : . : :- :'--- S:. :: -^ 3^ s State Commlttee
designed a high-speed long-range cruise mis- ples of the Tu-16 were stationed on normal ai:- ':' - . :-: - - = :': a:, -a'a Environmental Con-
fields along the missile's flight path; after iie '.'. Gcs.--:- :-:met On 4th APril 1976
sile powered by a ramjet engine designed by M
M Bondaryuk. Tests of the missile necessitated missile's launch they were able to take off a:c ',':= :-:-:: :-::-'.: --6 envisaging the con-
several command posts along the missile's track it. After Lavochkin's death in 1960 furthe: ,:': :- :- ::.:-: ---'is rlio Tu-l6Tsiklon-N
flight path for controlling its flight and making work on the missile was discontinued anci :le ,',:::-:' '::::-:- :':-:: :^e N fgfeffgd tO thg
whatever corrections were necessary. Airborne Tu-16KPs reverted to their original form. ::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 arlu
:: :-3--3OYnamlC and eleuLllu
:' :-: ::-:schere and cloud for-
rp-42 3E I

Though it looks Iike an M'15 target drone, '10

Red' (c n 820.{203) is the Tu'16RT telemetry
relay aircrafl used in missile test programmes.
Tu-16N1'{ Tsiklon CCCP-42355 No 1 (formerly
Tu.1 6N Tsiklon. c n 6203203) sits forlorn in a
remole corner of Chkalovskaya AB lollowing its
retirement from aclive duty' The aircraft's
origins as a Tu.16KSR.2'5 with a Rubin-lM radar
,b" .+
are patently obvious. the large teardrop radome
and missile pylons being plainly visible; all
armament has been removed. The Yuriy A
ffi: Gagarin Space Centre's Aero L-39C Albatros
trainers are lined up in the background.

A Tu-16 in 1973.standard Aeroflot livery certainly

was a slrange sight. CCCP'42484 (c/n 6203208)'
the other Tu-16N Tsiklon, differed slightly in
equipment fit and colour scheme (note the
angular dorsal sensor tairings). The rainmaking
chemical dispenser pods carried on the pylons
are probably modilied stock KMGU-1
submunitions dispensers used by tactical strike
aircraft and helicopters. Tupolev JSC

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
:'eused 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 both
i':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 tion at Chkalovskaya AB (its home base) in and armament. Such aircraft were usually
-:search aircraft in the Tsiklon series, the August 1999. Curiously, back in late 1987 the called Tu-1 6LL (letayuschchaya laboratoriya -
-,-16s (redesignated) wore the eye-catching registration CCCP-42355 was reused for a lit.'flying laboratory');this Russian term is used
-s klon emblem on the nose to clarify their Yakovlev Yak-42 short-haul airliner (c/n indiscriminately for any kind of testbed,
::crm chaser' role. 4520424711399) delivered to Aeroflot's research or survey aircraft.
The two Tu-1 6 Tsiklon-Ns served for more Lithuanian Civil Aviation Directorate; thus, con- Most often, however, the designation
--an ten years in a variety of scenarios over trary to all rules there were lwo aircraft with the Tu-161L applied to the nine engine testbeds
::ntral Russia and the Ukraine, including 'sky same registration operational at the same time! operated by Lll from Zhukovskiy. The Tu-1 6LLs
::aning' missions during the 1980 Moscow had the radar and all armament removed and
3 ympics and damage control in the wake of Tu-16 for Spraying Carbonic Acid carried the test engine in a special nacelle
:-e 1986 Chernobyl' nuclear disaster. Two Tu-16N tankers were used for spraying housed in the former bomb bay. The nacelle
carbonic acid in the late 1970s as part of the was semi-recessed during take-off/landing to
Tu-16 Tsiklon-NM Tsiklon research programme. They were based provide adequate ground clearance and
\Yeather Research Alrcraft at Chkalovskaya AB. extended clear of the fuselage by a special
f :r 1gth November '1 gBG the Soviet Council of hydraulic mechanism before the test engine
',linisters ordered that both Tu-16 Tsiklon-N air- Tu-16AFS Photo Survey Aircraft was started. The nacelle featured an emer-
:'aft should be re-equipped to enable them to ln the early 1970s a Tu-16 operated by one of gency jettison mechanism (in case it failed to
:articipate in international weather research the Soviet Air Force units (coded '69 Red', c/n retract before landing or the development
:fogrammes. Eventually only CCCP-42355 unknown) was re-equipped to perlorm aerial engine caught fire); a movable circular cover
:he first aircraft to be thus registered) was so photography along the route of the Baikal-Amur closed the air intake when the nacelle was
rodified, beginning its iests in 1991 which Railway. The Tu-1 6AFS (aerototos"yomshchik - stowed to prevent foreign object damage and
,'rere interrupted by the dlsintegration of the photo survey aircraft) operated from various stop the engine from windmilling. As a rule, test
JSSR that year. The Tu-16 Tsiklon-N and the civilian airports, although it was 'registered' to equipment heat exchangers were mounted on
-u-16 Tsiklon-NM were to have been used for Lll and officially home-based at Zhukovskiy. the upper centre fuselage or on the test engine
:re last time during the First Chechen War in nacelle.
'995-96 but they did not, in fact, take part and Tu-16LL Engine Testbed The first example to be adapted for engine
,vere retired soon afterwards. The fate of Starting in 1954, the Tu-16 was used on a wide testing was a standard bomber (tactical code
CCCP-42484 is unknown, while CCCP-42355 scale for testing new jet engines, structural unknown, c/n 1880403) built in Kuibyshev in
No 1 was last noted in reasonably good condi- components, assemblies, avionics, equipment 1954, which was used to test the Lyul'ka AL-7F

Close-up ol the nose of Tu-16NM Tsiklon

CCCP.42355 No 1, showing the characteristic
t- ;

logo carried by all weather research aircraft in 4d4#

the Tsiklon series; curiously, the type is marked
on the nose only as 'Tu'. The airliners in the
background are actually Tu-134LK-2 cosmonaut l',', -i
trainers operated by the Yuriy A Gagarin Space
Centre. Yefim Gordon

One of the Tu-l6LL engine testbeds operated by

Lll - presumably'01 Red' (c/n 6401501) - with a
large turbofan engine (probably a Solov'yov
PS-90) lowered into running position. Note the fili ii*,
irfil. '',
test equipment heat exchangers mounted l]i, I i
directly on the development engine's nacelle. lliii,ltl
Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

Tupolev Tu-1 6
Left: Another Tu.15LL '01 Blue' (c/n 6401401;
note the differentty aPPtied tactical code),
with a very similar develoPment engine
nacelle - right dohn to the test equipment heat
exchanger placen'lent ln this case, however'
,, : the test engine app€a6 to be an afterburning
turbofan, which required the rear end of the
nacelle to be lengfrened accordingly.
Crnm^ I --.::::: -_ _:-' -:

afterburning turbojet developed for the Sukhoi ln the 1970s and 1980s Tu-161L'41 Blue' O33'a::- :: := ::-: =: a^d engine operation
Su-7 fighter-bomber. The other Tu-16LLs were was modified for perlorming an extensive test ): 2- ^ : :--:: -: =-=-/:o be verified. As ln
adapted as test beds, including Voronezh-built and development program on the D-36 turbo- t^: ::s: :' :-= :-:^:: alone. the aircraft
'01 Blue' (c/n 6401 401 ), '03' (c/n 6401 403), '08' lan intended for the Antonov An-72 Coaler shorl ass=-: :: .',:': -:--331 r ihe former bomb
take-off and landing (STOL) light transpod and 3a, :^: :r,:':: : =:-::':'e engine starting.
(c/n 6401408),'41 Blue'(c/n 6401410) and'01
the Yak-42 C/obber short-haul airliner; at Lll this
...---.-^-. .-- .-----:s were used during
Red' (c/n 6401501), Kazan'-built '02 Blue' (c/n
42O1OO2) and '05 Blue' (c/n 8204105), and aircraft was known as the Tu-161L-410 At this c3,: ::-:-: ;,:-- :^ :le equipment and
Kuibyshev-built '10 Red' (c/n 1881110). Some time, too, the Tu-1 6LL found use for testing full- a'-:-:-:':-:-=',' 3-23 =',crum Iaclical fighter
30 engines, including the Dobrynin VD-7 after- size airframe assemblies together with their - -3-:--: - ^- --+ Tu-16: an example
-^ zs LL-88 was used to
burning turbojet, Kuznetsov NK-8, Solov'yov engrnes. For instance, '02 Blue'and '41 Blue
D-20P and D-30 turbofans, Tumanskiy R13-300 carried complete fuselages of the Yak-36M :es: :-: ::::, :l-13 ::e'burning turbofan.
and R158-300 afterburning turbojets, R-27 Forger shipboard vertical/short take-off and 3-=---' :--,',:: :::,',henthetestengineer
landing (V/STOL) attack aircraft incorporating !'- s:::- :-: : :,', :' :-: setting sun on the
afterburning turbofan, R27V-300 thrust-vector-
ing turbofan and R-29 afterburning iurbofan, an R27V-300 lift/cruise engine and a pair of r€.: ::-:-: :-: -: s ^acelte for a fire and the
Lotarev D-36 turbofan, Lyul'ka AL-7 and AL-7F Kolesov RD36-35V lift-jets; '10 Red' (probably e^:': :':,', == ==,-, :-3iherexamplecrashed
turbojets, lvchenko A|-25TL turbofan, Gavrilov called Tu-16LL-1 10 at Lll) and '02 Blue' carried cr -s: =::'-:-, '3-' <,lling the crew of five
a complete fuselage of the Czech Aero L-39 cao:a -:: :-. ---.':-:,ls:est pilot Sultan Amet-
R-95Sh turbofan and so on - in short, nearly all
Soviet second- and third-generation jet Albatros advanced trainer with an AI-25T1 K'z' -a'a :':-: S:. =: Union: the cause was
engines - were tested on these aircraft in the engine, and the like. These tests enabled the :":-::-: ..'-='.:- :'- :ab deflection which
course of some 30 Years. etfect of the air intake design on the engine s 3a-s::'.- = - z:' -: .l tr ve into the ground.

-.rn, T-L-a-{dl-,ll1L!1@*-

-. *i mw!*r**-

80 Tupolev Tu-1 6
''- -": ;'::hs on the opposite page::

:- ::: The detached development engine nacelle ol a Tu-1 6LL

-- {
n;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
in the background is a de-icing systems testbed.
*' :-- - :'rt: The detached tail fairing of the Tu-l6LL's development engine
sdfe. 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, showing
b sp€cial retractable pylon for the development engine nacelle and
-: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-7F

ftrburning turbojet. The development engine nacelle is identical to the
!r1ic in the preceding views.

-: , :- ::ght: For ground runs and installation/removal of the development

rmgine the Tu-l6LLs had to be parked on special elevated concrete ramps
E 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 a
rcial foreign obiect damage (FOD) prevention grille.
:n:r, its career Tu-l6LL'41 Blue' (c/n 6401410) was
right: At one stage of
Iled 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 deleted
rs superfluous lor their testbed role.

l:-::n left: A fighter engine (the convergent-divergent supersonic nozzle

s clearly visible) is prepared for a ground run beneath a Tu-l6LL. Note
fie tarpaulins covering the main gear bogies, the pan collecting any oil
caking lrom the test engine and lhe makeshift FOD prevention grille
tfected 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

Tupolev Tu-16 81
Lefi: Another air-to'air of Tu-'l6LL '41
Blue'with the D-36 out and running.
ln this configuration the test
equipment heat exchangers had to
be installed on the uPPer centre
fuselage. G:cmov Flighi Research

3:13,', .: a.3 right: Tu'l6LL'01 Blue'

(c n 6401401) makes a low Pass with
an unidentified development engine
in fully lowered position during the
Aviation Day flypast at Zhukovskiy
on 16th August 1990. Lll's airtield
was still ofl limits to the general
public then. so demonstration llights
were staged over sPecially built
public grandstands on the bank ol
the Moskva River. Victor Drushlyakov


? t€
:::.= Tu. l6LL'02 Blue' (cln 42O1OO2)
l= with a stowed develoPment engine

t sits in front of one of the PurPose'
buitl ramps at Zhukovskiy in the
199Os. ':'- Gcrcon archive

d. t
t k -:: The same aircraft in an earlier
configuration with a different test
engine taxies at Zhukovskiy' the
nacelle's intake firmly closed by the
shutter. Note the difterence in the
presentation and location of the
tactical code and c/n which changed
in the course of an overhaul.
--dd v:'- G:-::r archive

82 Tupolev TuJ 6
-: 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 Research
i-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 nozzle
r''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 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


{r,r, xr9i"n

IHnb-* I


Tupolev Tul 6 83

Abcve lei a^: 'g^: Tu-16LL'10 Red' (c/n

1881 1 10) was used for testing the lvchenko
Al.25TL turbofan - a version of the Al-257
optimised for the Aero L-39 Albatros advanced
trainer. ln order to accurately model the
interaction between the engine and the lateral
air intakes the development engine was
installed in an actual full-size L-39 fuselage,
seen here in semi-recessed position on the
ground. Gromcv F rghi Fesearch lnstitute

Left: Tu-16LL c/n 1881110 with the L-39 fuselage

lowered clear ol lhe bomb bay and the test
engine running. Gromov Flight Research lnstitule

Below left: To speed up thetrials of the A|-25TL a

second Tu-16LL ('02 Blue', c/n 4201002) was
similarly configured with an L-39 fuselage.
Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

Above: Air-to-surface missile? No indeed! The stowed L-39 luselage

on Tu-l5LL'10 Red', seen here approaching Zhukovskiy's runway
30, could be easily mistaken for a large ASM.
Victor Drushlyakov

Left: Tu-lGLL'41 Blue' (c/n 6401410) had a similar configuration at

one time, being used for testing the Tumanskiy R27V-300 thrust'
vectoring turbojet/Kolesov RD36-35V lift-jet combination installed
in a full-size luselage of a Yakovlev Yak.36M (Yak'381 Foryer
shipboard V/STOL attack aircraft. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

84 Tupolev Tu-1 6
: :* Close-up oltheYak-36M
'Essage lowered lor ground tests of
t* rovrerplant as Tu-'l6LL'41 Blue'
rlr Do the special ramps. The open
a-d air intake doors and the ventral
:s.-:shell exhaust doors lor the
ry€d RD36.35V lift-jets are just
'rrbrC in this view. Note the FOD
tgl€frtion wire mesh screens on the
Grd intakes of the lift/cruise engine
rlE *l€ short ogival nosecone tipped
ilif a pitot as incorporated on the
n -l first and second prototypes;
tllg gave place to a longer conical
ese on subsequent aircraft.
r: -:, iiight Research lnstitute
l+ : :i: Again, due to the high
lrcrityof the Yak-36M programme
a recond 'wish I had wings'
rselage/powerplant combination
res 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 Above right: Another view ol Tu-16LL'02 Blue' in 'Forgerised' configuration - probably the lirst in its
- :1e late 1950s and early 1 960s OKB-156 mod- capacity as an engine testbed; note that the standard bomb-aiming radar is still in place. Both nozzles
=:d two Tu-16s to serve as testbeds during ol the R27V-300 lift/cruise engine are visible here, Note that the aft fuselage underside is sheathed in
heat-resistant steel to protect the skin against the jet exhaust, Gromov Flight Research lnstitute
::relopment of the'121 'cruise missile and its
:-lduction derivative, the Tu-123 Yastreb (Hawk) Below: Tu-l6'44 Red' (cln 42OO4O4) was converted by Lll into a de-icing systems testbed with an
: -gersonic reconnaissance drone. Both aircraft aerofoil-shaped test article mounted dorsally on the centre fuselage. The tubular object on top of the
::ionged to Lll; one - obviously one of the starboard engine housing may be a heat exchanger, Gromov Flight Research lnstitute
---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
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
ks tgd}"'


:adome was installed at the extremity of the

rose (on the navigator's station glazing); to
prevent the heavy assembly from breaking
loose it was firmly secured to the forward fuse-
iage structure by four sloping twin bracing
struts and a horizontal beam ahead of theflight-
deck windscreen. A cine camera in an egg-
shaped fairing was fitted aft of the flightdeck to
record the guidance system's accuracy.

Tupolev Tul6 85
Left: An air-to-air shol of Lll's Tu-15 de.icing
systems 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 targeting
syslem/weapons testbed by the Myasishchev
Experimental Machinery Factory as part of the
eftort to create the M-17 'balloon killer' aircraft.
The weird shape ol the nose is visible in these
views. V c:o' l'-:- ,:':.

common ces cn 'n Soviet Air Force ser-

vice. Thus:he T;-'6KSR-2. Tu-16KSR-2A and
Tu-16KSR-IS ',',e:e generally given the com-
Tu-1 6 Undercarriage Testbed incorporating sighting windows, and the stan- mon desrgna: cn T;-16KSR-2, while both the
ln the late 1950s a single Tu-16 coded '56 Red' dard DT-7V turret was replaced by the one Tu-16K-1 1-16 aro Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 were
(c/n unknown) was adapted for ground tests of developed for the high{lyer. The distinctive referred ic as ihe Ti,-16K-11-16. The largest
the 'jump strut' nose landing gear mechanism nose profile made the 17LL-2, as the aircraft single groucrng ',','as ihe K-26 group, where the
devised for the Myasishchev M-50 Bounder was known, look uncannily like a saiga ante- designaiio" T;- 1 6K-26 might refer to a
supersonic heavy bomber. An extensible extra lope. Live weapons trials were carried out on Tu-16K-26. a Tu-i6K-26-07. a Tu-16K-26V, a
twin-wheel strut was mounted immediately aft this aircraft, using real balloons as targets. Tu- 1 6K-26 wrih a Rubin- 1 M radar, a
of the nose gear unit, emulating the M-50's Tu-16KSR-2-5 a Tu-16K-26-2-5 with a Rubin-
four-wheel nose gear bogie which could be ln describing the variants of the Tu-16, the dif- 1M radar cr a Tu-16KSR-2-5-11. Only the
tilted to increase the angle of attack on take-off. ferences between the various versions equipped Tu-16K-26P ASM version armed with anti-ship-
This feature was necessary because the M-50 for in-flight refuelling have not been described ping missiles reiained its own individual desig-
had a bicycle landing gear. in detail. The distinguishing features of the IFR nation in seuadron service.
system have been covered in descriptions of The specialised naval missile-toting versions
17LL-1 Testbed the Tu-16 (ZA) and Tu-16K-10(ZA). ln all other were treated in a similar fashion. ln squadron
ln 1978 a modified Tu-16 (obviously again one respects the aircraft were identical to those service the Tu-16K-10, Tu-16K-10D.
of the aforementioned Tu-16LLs) was supplied without IFR capability. Tu-16K-10N and Tu-16K-10P had the common
to Lll as the 17LL-1 for use in tests of the lnitially aircraft equipped for IFR were denoted designation Tu-16K-10. Sometimes the
Kolesov RD36-51V turbofan scheduled for by the letters ZA in brackets: Tu-16(ZA), Tu-l 6K-10D was given its own individual des-
installation in the Myasishchev M-17 Mystic-A Tu-1 64(24), Tu-1 6KS(ZA), Tu-l 6K-10(ZA) and ignation. Similarly K-26 ASM versions, includ-
high-altltude aircraft. The 17LL-1 carried the so on. Later the brackets were omitted and the ing the Tu-16K-10-26, Tu-16K-10-26D and
engine in a special ventral nacelle which was aircraft designated as Tu-1624, Tu- 16424, Tu-16K-10-26N, were referred to by the desig-
lowered into the slipstream when test runs of Tu-16KSZA, Tu-16K-102A, Tu-16RZA and so nation Tu-1 6K-1 0-26. The exceptions were the
the RD36-51V were carried out. on. Occasionally the letters 'za' in lower case Tu-16K-10-26P equipped with the Ritsa radar
were used in documents - Tu-1 6za, Tu-1 6Rza. homing system and KSR-SP anti-shipping mis-
17LL-2 Testbed Tu-1 6Eza and so on. Once the IFR system had siles and the Tu-l6K-10-268, the only version
A Tu-16K-10(ZA) coded '57 Red' (the c/n ends become an almost standard feature of the air of the K-10 family with bombing capability.
...2042) was obtained from the Soviet Navy by craft and most Tu-16s possessed IFR capabil- Sometimes the Tu-16KS was referred to by
the Myasishchev Experimental Machinery Fac- ity, the letters 'ZA' were no long used and the the alternative designations Tu-16KS 'E' or
tory and converted for testing the search and designation reverted to its original form: Tu-1 6KS (E), the letter 'E' indicating that the air-
targeting system (STS) and gun turret devel- Tu-164, Tu-16E and so on. To determine craft was armed with the Kometa ASM which
oped Jor the M-l7. (Best known as a recon- whether a pafticular example was IFR-capable was given the production designation 'izdeliye
naissance and research aircraft, the M-17 was or not you needed to see its record card where E'for security reasons. For this reason a series
conceived for use against drifting reconnais- the ZA suffix was retained. of orders for the Tu-l6 to be converted fron
sance balloons which were a real menace right There were subtleties in the designation of one version to another had only letter suffixes
up to the end of the 1 970s.) The nose radomes missile-carrying versions, and various modifi- to differentiate them - for instance, 3524 anc
were replaced by the M-17's forward fuselage cations were often 'grouped together' under a 352E,497A and 497E, depending on the origl-

Tupolev Tu-1 6

-: : ,: ieft: The first Kuibyshev-built Tu-16 ('57

i€d'. c/n 1880101) was converted into a missile
llridance systems testbed. The missile's radar
r€eker head installed on the nose glazing (with
'!,teining braces) and the cine camera'egg'aft
3f 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
::. lnstitute

:lose.up ol the nose of Tu-l 6 '24 Red' (c/n

'3€o101); the missile's radar seeker head has
reen removed, leaving only the braced mounting
a'at{orm. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

lu-16 '30 Red'seen in one of Lll's hangars

iuring conversion into a testbed of unknown
atrrpose. Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

:his Tu-l6 was used for ejection seat tests,

:i€re a seat with a dummy is seen leaving the
ltghtdeck; a special hatch with a reinlorcement
slate around it appears to have been incorporated
ior 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
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
- weapons system), although
ai 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 the
Buket, Kaktus and Fikus ECM systems orthose
armed with the RPZ-59'anti-radar' missile, and
ihey were all frequently referred to as the
Tu-16P. On the other hand, the Tu-16E was
almost invariably referred to as the Yolka,
although this particular designation was borne
by the special Tu-16 Yolka. The Tu-16ER was
referred to as a normal Tu-16E, while the
Tu-16E itself in its chemical reconnaissance
version was given the 'unofficial' designation
Tu- 1 6E-KhR.
ln Soviet Air Force service no distinction was
made between the Tu-16NN and Tu-16N
tankers, which were both known by the latter

Tupolev Tu-1 6 87
Top left: Tu-16'46 Red' (c/n 1881907) starred in a Soviet motion picture called Bottom left: Tu-l6'56 Red'was converted into a testbed for the'iump strut'
The barriet of the llnknown, depicting a'mother ship'lor an imaginary nose landing gear devised lor the Myasishchev M'50 bomber. This view
hypersonic rocket-powered research aircraft designated Ts-1' This photo shows the telescopic second nose gear at maximum extension; note the
shows preparations tor a static filming sequence' Yefim Gordon archive auxiliary wheels on the tail bumper. Gromov Fiight Research lnstitute

Top right: A GAZ-69A ieep tows a dolly with the partially assembled full' Bottom right: Close-up of ihe highly modified nose gear unit of Tu-l6'56
scale mock-up of the would-be Ts-l . The Tu-l 6 made high'speed taxi runs Red'. The olficer standing next to the aircraft is holding a control box lor
but did not fly with the Ts-l because the mock'up was not stressed to the 'iump strut' mechanism connected to the aircraft by a cable.
withstand dynamic pressures. Yefim Gordon archive Gromov Flight Research lnstitute

designation. Target drones were also given the technology had two designations: the actual implemented by order numbers. Orders for
common designation M-16, and Tu-16M was one (which was classified) and an unclassified production or modification were issued by the
rarely used. The Tu-16PLO is sometimes designation for everyday use in a service con- aircraft's operators - the Soviet Air Force (WS),
referred to as the Tu-16PL in documents, and text. Thus Tu-16 was the actual designation, the Soviet Naval Air Arm (AVMF) or the Air
the Tu- 1 62 tanker as the Tu-1 6Yu. wilh'izdeliye N' as the unclassified 'cover des- Defence Force (PVO).
When aircraft were refitted, special attention ignation'. ln unclassified documents the desig- Order '684' for the increase in bomb-carrying
was given to lncreasing the bomb-carrying nation Tu-16 was changed to 'N', with the capacity was especially unusual in that several
capacity (under the terms of 'order 684') version designator letters added, when led to versions of the Tu-16 were affected. Some
and in OKB-156 such modifications were given some monstrous ciphers, Thus the Tu-1 64 was versions merely had their capabilities as
the 'B' suffix. But even within the design the 'NA' and the Tu-16R was the 'NR', which bombers enhanced, while others assumed a
bureau itself the designations Tu-1648, was tolerable; but the Tu-16REZA became the bombing capability they had not had before.
Tu-1 6KSR-28, Tu-1 6K-1 1 -1 68, Tu-1 6KSR-2-58 'NREZA', the Tu-16KRMEZA turned into Refits under the terms of 'order 684' began in
and Tu-16KSR-2-118 were hardly ever used, 'NKRMEZA' and the Tu-16K-10 the 'NK-10'. 1972 and involved aircraft previously modified
nor were they used by service squadrons. Even After declassif ication, the izdel iye designations in accordance with 'order 657'. Aircraft which
the aircraft record cards showed no change in for the Tu-16 fell into disuse. had hitherto lacked bomber capability could
designation, with just a note made to the effect Over its many years of service, the Tu-16 was be affected by both orders. These orders
that the machine had been modified to carry a subjected to many kinds of refits and modifica- brought no change in the aircraft's designation.
greater bomb load. Exceptions to this were the tions which were denoted as 'orders' followed Only the Tu-1 6K-11-16 was redesignatec
Tu-16K-26B and Tu-16K-10-268 whose desig- by a series number. Since othertypes of aircraft Tu-16K-26B when it was equipped with the
nations rarely appear in special documents. ln underwent similar alterations, the numbering of K-26 ASM and received an increased bomb
squadron service these designations were the orders was strictly sequential. The degree load. Similar work was carried out in the Navar
hardly ever used. of work involved in these orders varied - from Air Arm when the Tu-16K-10-26 was modified tc
The Tu-16 was also subject to the secrecy replacing a certain item of equipment to a cap- carry bombs, Originally these machines Iackec
imposed on all Soviet military equipment in the ital refit inio an entirely new version. Manufac- bombing capability and were redesignatec
post-war years. Almost every item of military ture of the aircraft at MAP factories was also Tu- 1 6K-1 0-268 after modification.


88 Tupolev Tu-1 6
Chapter Seven

Structu ral Descri Ption

--= 'cllowing description relates to the pro- Fuselage fuselage circumference at 10" intervals; auxiliary
:-:::n bomber version of the Tu-l6 ('order Monocoque all-metal structure of basically cir- stringers were used in some places to reinforce
:,: tzdeliye N) built in the mid-1950s, and cular cross-section with a smooth stressed skin the skin in the gaps between the basic stringers
- -:-:cted by subsequent bulletins concerning supported by frames and stringers made of The overall number of basic stringers in the for-
-: : 'craft's systems, armament and equipment. pressed and formed components. Fuselage ward section of the fuselage was 36, wlth fewer
-^e Tu-1 6 was a high-speed long-range jei length 34.6m, fuselage diameter 2.5m, fineness in the aft section. Where the structure was
::-3er (or, in the light of its many modifica- ratio 13.9. The fuselage featured 75 frames set at weakened by cutouts, extra transverse and lon-
: - s a multi-role long-range jet aircraft) intervals of 260-570mm; the cylindrical portion of gitudinal reinforcing beams were provided to
:.: :ned to carry out heavy bombing raids on the fuselage was located between f rames Nos 1 2 absorb the loads from the structure's load-
,--::egic enemy targets. lt could operate singly and 46. The stringers were placed around the bearing elements, equipment and armament.
:' :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 I "i;S***
: -:'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
proximity to the fuselage
='e sltuated in close

:- 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
:^e undercarriage down and flaps set at 35",
:^e 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: Thelorward fuselage of a typical

'glass-nosed' Tu-16, showing the navigator's
station glazing and the chin radome of the
RBP-4 radar, Note the dorsal observation/
gun.aiming blister and the triple rod aerials
of the SRO-2M Khrom (NATO Odd Rods) IFF
transponder, Yefim Gordon

Right: Another perspective ol the lorward

luselage (this time a Tu-l6KS), showing the
navigator's ventral eiection hatch, the entry
hatch aft of the radome, and the lixed for\ rard'
tiring cannon on the starboard side'
Yefim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-1 6
The fuselage skin rvas made of D16ATV
and Dl6ATNV dural.rr-nin and their varieties;
skin thickness ',vas 1-2mm, increasing to

_ ror%n 3mm in the mosi highly stressed areas. The

frames and stringe's rvere also made of these
materials. frorr fr'lA8 magnesium alloys also
being used. The navigator's station glazing
frame. the eniry hatcr and ventral escape hatch
covers. the frames ol ihese hatches and the
framework oi :he iarl gunner's station glazing
were made ci i''1L5 magnesium alloy and its
varieties. and scme non-load-bearing parts of
the fuselage ',vere made of sheet magnesium
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 the
gun barbeties). by brazier-head rivets; button-
head riveis rvere used in zones not subjected to
the airflovr. Double-row rivet joints were used
throughoui. The fuselage was assembled in
five sections:

- seciion F-1 r'lhe navigator's station glazing

- sectron F-2 (the forward fuselage between
frames Nos 2 and 12)
- 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


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 ai
frame 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 the

antenna array of the Ritsa radar homing system
on the navigator's station glazing and the lack ol
the forward-liring cannon whose position is
blanked oft. Yefim Gordon

The nose ol a Tu-16KRME target drone carrier

('08', c/n 1883704) featuring lateral radio control
syslem antenna pods. Note the shape ol the
optically llat window. Yuriy Kabernik archive

The nose of the Tu-l6K-10 is extensively

modilied to accommodate the twin antennas of
the YeS target illumination/missile guidance
radar. Tupolev JSC

Tupolev Tu-1 6
,;:W$'#, i{,3peww"e


-.::ion F-6) accommodated the radio opera- AFA-33M aerial camera, the dorsal gun posi- Top lelt: The centre luselage underside of the
Tu-l6P Buket ECM aircraft, showing the
:- JUnner (working the ventral gun barbette) tion, the KPZh-3O liquid oxygen converter for
centrally mounted canoe fairing of the emitter
:-: ihe defensive fire commander who oper- the forward cabin, the AC generator and other antenna llanked by three heat exchangers and a
:-:r the tail gun barbette and the PRS-1 Argon equipment. Above the compartment was the cooling air intake. YeJim Gordon
. - ^ r'anging radar. Access to the forward cabln container for the LAS-SM dinghy for the aircrew
:s via a ventral hatchway under the WSO's in the forward cabin. Further back was fuel tank Top right: The llightdeck canopy, showing the
jettisonable upper sections for eiection, the
: ::,iion and to the rear crew cabin via a ventral No 2, the wing centre section with the No 3 fuel
sliding direct vision windows and the dorsal
-:::rway under the defensive fire comman- tank. beneath which the No4 fuel tank was ECM antenna lairing (a mid-life update). Note
::- s seat, lf the aircraft had to put down on located. The weapons bay closed by two doors that the dorsal observation/gun-aiming blister is
::er or make a belly landing, the crew could was situated immediately aft of the wing centre built into an escape hatch. Yuriy Kabernik archive
,::ape from the forward cabin through a hatch section and went back as far as the Nos 5 and
- :re glazing, and from the aft cabin through an 6 fuel tanks. Under the No5 fuel tank was a
:-3rgency exit in the tail gunner's station glaz- compartment for illumination and signalling
-; The aircraft would remain afloat long flare bombs, also closed by twin doors. Aft of
:^cugh to enable the crew to take to their the tanks came the rear equipment bay hous-
- ing the ventral gun barbette, the KPZh-30 LOX
"ghies. Each crewmember was supplied with Bottom left: The centre luselage of Tu-16 '17 Red'
: cersonal first-aid kit, a thermos flask, in-flight converter and dinghy container ior the aft cabin
(cln 52O29O7), showing the open bomb bay
-:: cns, an emergency radio and emergency crew and other equipment. The Argon radar doors, the rear portion of the starboard engine
-::icns. was positioned above the aft cabin. nacelle and the nacelle/fuselage fairing.
lJnder the forward pressure cabin was a The brake parachutes were to reduce the Yefim Gordon
:lmpartment for the RBP-4's antenna closed landing run and were deployed when landing
Bottom right: On some special mission variants,
:; a dielectric fairing. lmmediately behind this on a waterlogged or short runway, an unpaved
including this... um.,. masculine-looking version
.,,as the nosewheel well closed by two doors; airstrip, after an incorrectly executed landing (probably an EGM aircraft ol some sort), the
n3ove it was the No 1 fuel tank. The nosewheel approach or in the case of brake failure. The bomb bay doors are non-functional. Note that
,',ell gave access to the DC batteries and the parachutes were housed in a detachable con- the engine nacelle/fuselage lairing is skinned in
':..ward equipment bay which housed the tainer in the lower rear fuselage. The PT-16 heat-resistant steel. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-1 6 91
brake-parachute system gave a landing run of The trailing edge section of the wings was The horizontal tail of similar two-spar design
no more than 1 ,535m on a dry concrete runway occupied along the entire span by flaps and had a span of 11.75m and an area of 34.452m':
with automatic wheel braking applied and the ailerons. The slotted Fowler flaps were built in sweepback at quarterchord 42', leading-edge
parachutes opened after touching down at a two sections located inboard and outboard of sweep 45', no dihedral. The tailplanes were
speed no higher than 270kmlh, at a landing the main landing gear fairings; flap settlngs likewise attached to fuselage frames Nos 64
weight no greater than 47,000k9. were 20" for take-off and 35" for landing. The and 69 by bolts at four points (two points at
one-piece ailerons were of single-spar con- each frame). Tailplane incidence was -1 .5' and
Wings struction and carried on five brackets each, could be adjusted on the ground between 0"
Cantilever mid-set wings swept back 35' at featuring internal overhand balances for aero- and -2.5" at 0.5" increments, using the holes in
quarter-chord (leading edge sweep is 37" ftom dynamic compensation; each aileron incorpo- the attachment fittings on the fuselage. The
root to rib No 7 and 36" along the remainder of rated a trim tab. smooth tailplaneifuselage junction was
the span). Anhedral 3", incidence 1", aspect The centre section was the central part of the effected by a fillet which was attached by
ratio 6.627, laper 2.416; wing span 32.98m, wing located between fuselage frames Nos.26 screws to the lower stabiliser skin and to the
wing area 164.65m'. The mean aerodynamic and 33. The inner detachable wing sections side of the fuselage.
chord (MAC) is 5.021m. were attached to it. The centre section was a The one-piece elevators were of single-spar
The wings were built in five pieces: the cen- load-bearing box structure and consisted of a construction and connected on the centreline by
tre section built integrally with the fuselage, front and rear spar, two connecting ribs and one a shaft with a universal joint ensuring simultane-
inner (first) and outer (second) detachable sec- centreline rib, and upper and lower skin panels. ous deflection. Each elevator was carried on five
tions. The centre section is joined to the lnner The centre section skin was smooth and com- brackets and incorporated a trim tab. Maximum
wing sections along the fuselage sides, the posed of aluminium alloy sheets 3-5mm thick. deflection angles were 12" down and 26" up.
outer wing sections being mated to the inner
ones at rib No 7; the engine housings were built Tail Unit Landing Gear
integrally with the inner wings. The wings were Conventional cantilever swept tail surfaces, Hydraulically retractable tricycle type; all three
made of D16T, D164T and Dl6ATNV duralu- utilising symmetrical aerofoil sections. The tail units retracted aft. Wheel track 9.775m, wheel-
min, AK-6, AK-B and V95 aluminium alloy; flush assembly was made of duralumin, except for base 10.913m. All three units had oleo-pneu-
riveting was used throughout. the attachment fittings and bolts (which were maiic shock absorbers and scissor links.
The wings were of all-metal two-spar con- mostly made of steel) and the wooden fairing at The nose unit had twin 900 x 275mm non-
struction. The central portion (the torsion box) the top of the fin. All duralumin parts were elec- braking wheels and a shimmy damper; it was
is made up of panels with thick skinning rein- trochemically coated, the steel parts primed, steerable through +40" for taxylng. The main
forced by stringers. From the fuselage out to rib and the wooden part coated with VIAM-B3 units featured four-wheel bogies equipped
No12 the torsion box structure is utilised to bonding agent to prevent decaY. with KT-16, Kr-1612, KT-16/2M, Kr-1612U or
accommodate flexible fuel tanks. The leading The vertical tail was a two-spar structure with KT-16/2D brake wheels, all measuring 1,100
edge of the inner and outer wings and the an area of 23.305m'; sweepback at quarter- x 330mm. During retraction they are rotated
wingtip fairings were detachable. The wings chord 42',leading-edge sweep 46". The fin was aft through 1S0' by separate hydraulic rams/
were made up of different aerofoil sections (the attached to fuselage frames Nos 64 and 69 by rocking dampers to lie inverted in the stream-
aerofoil varied along the span). A TsAGI PR- bolts at four points (two points at each frame). lined fairings protruding beyond the wing
S-10S-9 symmetrical section with a thick- A smooth fin/fuselage joint was provided by a trailing edge.
ness/chord ratio of 15.7o/o was used at the fillet attached by screws. The one-piece rudder A retractable tail bumper protected the aft
roots, a TsAGI SR-1 1-12 aerofoil with a thick- of single-spar construction was hinged on fuselage in the event of overrotation or a tail-
ness/chord ratio of 15% at rib No 7 and a TsAGI three brackets and a lower support, featuring down landing;itwas extended and retracied by
SR-1 1-12 aerofoil with a thickness/chord ratio aerodynamic balancing and a trim tab. Maxi- an electrical mechanism simultaneously with
oI 12/" aI the tiPS. mum rudder deflection was +25'. gear retraction/extension.

Tupolev Tu-1 6


-::.= left: The Tu-16's air intakes have a

::aracteristic shape resembling a triangle with
:Llged sides and rounded corners, Note the
where the luselage is
=ncave fuselage side
rea-ruled at the wing/nacelle/fuselage joint.
:-- Gordon

-::,: right: The Mikulin AM-3 turboiet. The long

r--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 nozzle. Three accessory gearboxes (Ieft, right There were separate lubrication systems for
-,1c Mikulin AM-3 (RD-3) turbojets with a take- and lower) were provided. Starting was by the engines and the turbostarters; the engines
:- thrust of B,750kg or two RD-3M turbojets means of an S300M turbostarter a small gas featured an engine control system and the
', :.r a take-off thrust of 9,500k9 (later replaced turbine engine housed in the air intake centre- required engine monitoring instruments.
:. RD-3M-500s or
RD-3M-500As with an body and driving the spool directly via a clutch Most aircraft left the factories with RD-3M
-3reased time between overhauls and better (the term 'jet fuel starter' is not applicable, since engines, which were replaced later in squadron
'= rability). Specific fuel consumption (SFC) at the S300M ran on aviation gasoline); there service by its later RD-3M-500 and RD-3M-500A
:'-rse power 0.97k9/kgp'hr; engine pressure were four igniters. derivatives. Eventually all Tu-1 6s remaining in
-a:io 6.4 at maximum powerlT.2 at contingency The engines and their accessories were service were fitted with RD-3M-500 engines.
-::ing, Length overall 5.38m, casing diameter located on either side of the fuselage behind
' .+m, dry weight 3,100k9. the rear wing spar in housings immediately Fuel System
The AM-3 (RD-3) was an axialJlow non-after- adjacent to the fuselage, which were The Tu-1 6 used two types of fuel: a primary f uel
:lrning turbojet with a fixed-area subsonic air 'squeezed' into the centre fuselage sides to (T-1 or TS-1 kerosene) and a starter fuel for the
riake, an elght-stage compressor, an annular minimise the cross-section area in accordance engines' turbostarters (B-70 aviation gasoline).
:cmbustion chamber with 14 flame tubes, a with the area rule. The rear sections of the The aircraft had, therefore, two fuel systems.
:,'/o-stage turbine and a fixed-area subsonic engine housings served as a protection, safe- The primary fuel system consisted of two sep-
guarding the fuselage from the effect of arate subsystems, one for each engine. lf nec-
exhaust gases emerging at high temperatures. essary, both systems could be connected via a
Joposite left: The lin incorporates llush antennas
ior the short.range radio navigation system and The housing consisted of forward and centre cross-feed valve. The system had electronic
has a wooden tip fairing. On aircraft intended to sections, cowling and exhaust section. The automatic controls ensuring a strictly set
operate in a nuclear environment the undersides engine air intakes were located well forward of sequence of fuel consumption and measuring
and the rudder are painted gloss white. '18 Red' the wing leading edge, the air being fed to the the fuel quantity. Provision was made for in-
(c/n 1883701) at Akhtoobinsk is a Tu-I5 Yolka
engines via long ducts which were divided by a flight refuelling of the aircraft's fuselage tanks
ECM aircraft. Yefim Gordon
partition into upper and lower ducts routed and for emergency fuel jettisoning.
Cpposite right: The rear fuselage and tail unit of around the wing spar; these merged again aft The fuel was carried in 27 flexible rubber
the Tu-15R.2 reconnaissance aircrafl'showing of the rear spar at the engines' compressor tanks making up ten groups (five for each
the tail gunner's station and the characteristic faces. Part of the air was diverted for cooling the engine). Within each group the tanks were
lateral observation/sighting blisters of the
engine accessories and the engine housings interconnected and formed one large fuel
defensive lire commander's station. The dark
panel immediately ahead of the port stabiliser is proper, subsequently being ejected together resource. Each group had a supply tank from
the cover of a rescue dinghy bay, Yefim Gordon with the engine efflux. which the fuel was drawn. At the normal all-up

Tupolev Tu'16 93
weight o{ 72,OOOkg the maximum fuel load As a safety measure, the DC supply was The air pressure in the cabins was main-
comprised 34,360k9 (equals 41 ,400 litres of delivered through three circuits: tained by ARD-54 or ARD-50 automatic valves
T-1 or 43,750 litres of TS-1). The full fuel capac- or regulators, one of which was fitted in each
ity of the aircraft was 43,800 litres. The tanks - a normal circuit which could draw on all four cabin. The air temperature in the pressurised
belonging to the 1st, 2nd, 3rd, 4th and Sth generators in any combination and the DC cabins was maintained automatically by
groups were located in the fuselage, two tanks batteries TRTVK-4s (TRTVK-4sM) air temperature regu-
of the 6th group in the wing centre section; the - an emergency circuit which drew on only one lators. The pressurisation system provided the
tanks of the 7th,Bth, gth, 1 Oth and 1 1 th groups generator and one DC battery following:
were housed in the detachable inner wing tor- - a dual circuit which automatically switched itself
sion boxes, while the tanks of the 12th, 13th, over either to the normal or emergency supply. - lrom an altitude of 7.250m and above a constant
pressure differential of 0.4kglcm'
14th, 1sth and 16th group were accommo-
dated in the outer wing section. Each group of The circuit wiring was mainly BPVL and MGShV - on entering a zone of anti-aircraft fire or combat
tanks had a single filler cap; during ground copper single-strand wire and BPVLA alu- with enemy fighters, the pressure differential was
refuelling, each group of tanks had to be filled minium wire. To reduce radio intederence, part reduced to 0.2kg/cm'by either KKD (manual) or

separately. The supply tank in each group had of the copper wiring was screened (BPVLE) or ARD-54 (automatic) valves in order to avoid a

a ETsN-T electric booster pump, but the supply enclosed in a screened sheath. sudden drop in the cabin pressure when the
tanks for the 2nd and sth groups had two such The interior lighting equipment comprised aircralt s skin was pierced.
pumps to ensure greater reliability. PS-45 and PSM-51 overhead lights, KLSRK-4S
A vent system for the fuel tanks was incor- light fittings, ARUFOSh-45 ultra-violet lights for ln the event that the ARD-54 valves were out
porated. Provision was made for emergency the instrument panels to make the dials glow in of action in both cabins, pressure could be

fuel jettisoning from the tanks of the 1st, 3rd the dark and PL-10-36 movable lamps. The maintained using the KKD manual valves.
and 4th groups. exterior lighting comprised BANO-4S naviga- allowing the pressure differential to be main-
All fuel tanks (apart from the tanks of the 1st, tion llghts on the wingtips, a KhS-39 (or tained at 0.05-0.43k9/cm'. The cabins'temper
2nd and Sth groups, the fuel from which was KhS-57) tail navigation light in the lower part of ature could be automatically regulated within
consumed first) were self-sealing. An inert gas the tail fairing, LFSV-4S or FRS-200 landing set limits between + 15.5 and +26.5"C or man-
pressurisation system using carbon dioxide lights in the lower part of the fuselage at frame ually between + 10 and +30"C.
was provided to minimlse the risk of fire and No 13, FR-100 taxying lights fitted to the nose
explosion if hit by enemy fire. gear strut, PSSO-45 formation/anti-collision Orygen Equipment
lights on the starboard nosewheel well door The Tu-16 was the first Soviet aircraft to carry
Electrical System and the centre fuselage upper surface and an oxygen in liquid form which was then converteo
Two electrical supply circuits. Main 28-28.5 V SMF-1 light for illuminating the tanker's fuel to gaseous form. The use of liquid oxygen
(LOX) achieved a weight and volume saving six
DC power was supplied by four of 1B-kW transfer hose during night contacts.
GSR-18000 engine-driven generators working or seven times greater than that obtained with
in parallel to power a common circuit, each Pressurisation & Air Conditioning System gaseous oxygen.
engine driving two generators. Each generator The Tu-16 had the following equipment The oxygen equipment was provided tc
worked with a RUG-82 carbon voltage regula- enabling high-altitude operation: allow flying at high altitudes and ensure survivar
tor, a DMR-500 differential minimum relay and after ejection in an emergency. The oxyger
a BS-1800 ballast resistor (the latter maintained - a system for heating the pressure cabins using equipment iherefore belonged to two cate-
the voltage of the generator, protected it engine bleed air gories: that supplied to the crew stations anc
against reverse currents and ensured opera- - a ventilation system providing fresh air from
that forming part of the rescue equipment. The
tion in parallel with the other generaior). outside at low altitudes crew station oxygen was administered by the
Backup DC power was Provided bY two - systems for pressurising the entry and escape use of oxygen masks in normal flight condi-
12SAM-53 or 12SAM-55 storage batteries. hatches with compressed air, using rubber seals tions. lt consisted of two KPZh-30 LOX contain-
Ground power supply was provided via a in the hatch frames ers. six KP-24 breathing apparatus (KP-16 ot-
RAP or ShRA-400LK connecior on the porl side early production aircraft) with KM-24 masks, as
located at frame No16. The operation of the Air for warming the pressure cabins was bled well as fixtures. manometers and charging cotr-
electric power sources was monitored with the from the seventh compressor stage of both nectors.
aid of four type A-3 ammeters, a type A-2 (A-1) engines via a TKhU-128 cooling turbine. The The emergency equipment was for uss

ammeter and a switchable V-1 voltmeter. maximum permissible f low of air through each of when ejecting from the aircraft at high altitudes
1 15V/400H2 single-phase AC power was pro- the two cabins was 500m' per hour. The quan- Each crewmember had aKP-23 parachute un :
vided by two type PO-4500 conveders, each of tity of air supplied to the two cabins from both as part of his PLK-45 parachute pack.
which worked with a R-25V carbon voltage regu- engines was 2,000m' per hour, which allowed
lator and an RS-4M rheostat. One conveder was the system to work using only one engine De-icing System
used while the other was a back-up; these oper- At low altitudes the cabin ventilation system The hot air de-icing system comprised two sec-
ationat modes were switched periodically with provided fresh air up to an altitude of 2,000m. lt arate subsystems: one for de-icing the leadin;
the aim of equally sharing the wear on the carbon was mainly used in hot weather when the cabin edges of the wings and one for de-icing ele-
brushes and the converters' service life. Control temperature on the ground could be anywhere ments of the engine housings. The wing leac'
was exercised through a VF-150 voltmeter. between +20 and +40"C. The air for the for- ing edge de-icing system was fed by tv':
ln addition to the main power sources, there ward cabin was induced through an air intake branch pipes which distributed air bled fro-
were various autonomous system and sub-unii on the starboard side of the fuselage at frame the eighth compressor stage, the port wir:
sources of electrical supply to provide the No 13, and for the rear cabin through an intake being supplied from the port engine and ti-=
required power for the control, navigation and in the front of the fin. starboard wing from the starboard engin:
communications systems. These were type The pressurisation system relied on rubber Both main supply plpes were connected so tha:
PAG-1 F, PT-125Ts (later PT-200Ts) three- seals between the hatch covers and hatch if one engine failed the system could still b:
phase AC converters, MA-1 (later PO-500) sin- irames. The cabins themselves were pres- supplied by the other engine. The de-icing sys-
gle-phase AC converters and U-500 and surrsed with compressed air from the onboard tem for elements of the engine housing:
RU-1 lAlV dynamotors/converters . pneumatic system. heated the air intake leading edges, i-:

Tupolev Tu-1 6
-'iG captain's eiection seat, control column and
lsfument panel. The large handwheel on the
dt operates the elevator trim tabs.
1c co-pilot's control column and instrument
rfiFl. The aircraft type is marked on the control
-rEel hubs. The passage on the left leads to the
siJator's station,

-,tG navigator's station commanded an excellent

s:1. The navigator sat sideways, with the
rln€ipal navigation instruments on the left wall;
rote the radar display and the rubber-bladed
sling 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 optical
s:'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

fire extinguisher bottles charged with
(later with grade '3.5' or 11Y2
=iron dioxide
:- 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
by an autopilot.

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

fupolev Tu-1 6
The Tu-16 had conventional electromechanical
instruments throughout. Each of the pilots could
deploy and jettison the brake parachute by
pushing buttons on the instrument panel (here,
they are immediately to the right of the bank ol
caulion/warning lights). Yuriy Kabernik archive

The starboard instrument panel ol a Tu'16(Z)

tanker. The tuel transfer control panel is located
to 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 and
the lower hall for the starboard station' lt
leatures guarded switches for (left to right)
oxidiser dumping. launch abort, warhead
arming disarming and emergency jettison of
the missile, \ -- _. (:c:r: < archive

Subsec;e^:', 1 ::'te course of series produc-

Lcc.::s -ociiication and service experl-
ence. :^e 'e3 3 navigation equipment was
rene,".: l^ -o:e ihan one occasion and by
lhe 3rc .' :s :3e.aironal life it differed slightly
on 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; the
i e vv Jvr et

1,'1RP-aa: -a--:e- oeacon receiver was replaced

or,:^e '.'::-56? an A-711 LORAN system was
:.:e: :::::-:' ,',:r :he A-713M receiver; an
ARK--2 : -::: o^ i nder was fitted. Some
Tu-'6s -a: :^= RSBN-2S Svod short-range
'a3 c ^a, 3=::- j SHORAN) system; finally, an
!--a)^:^--=- ^^ ^.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: performed the following

- 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
=':-: :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':-: :^a: caie were refitted with the

C:--,':-.-::'s equipmenf; The Tu-16 had

te :^e ': :,', -l 'acrc equipment: a 1-RSB-7OM
[F:'--...:- 4 =-::- - l-.'-:lJency (HF) communications
-trt:M '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 radio
5.q rr2rer the RSIU_5V and
!e u \rs!!

r-332',' !,'=lipt lEucalyptus) VHF radios were

96 Tupolev Tu-1 6
-tr€ iiews of the UKhO tail fairing of a Tu-I6E
llca:/a undergoing conversion to an M-l5-2
4€l drone at ARZ No 12 in Khabarovsk.
, ':33rnik archive
-18 Dort underwing pod housing an SRS-3
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 R '1

::--: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 (samolyotnyy
zniiolokatsionnyy 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,
:^e bomber versions (Tu-16 and Tu-164) had
---e SPS-S (SPS-SM) active jammer and the
S 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-3
jynamic pressure indicator; a BSPK-1 unit for
comparison?) and banking limits, installed
Juring squadron service; an EUP-46 turn angle
ndicator (later EUP-53); an MS-1 Mach meter;
a AM-10 accelerometer; an IAS-51 aircraft sex-
:ant; AChKhO and AVR-M clocks (later the
AChS-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-controlled
tachometers 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 consumption
gauges, and fuel gauges making up part ofthe
SETS-60D fuel metering kit.
The basic flight/navigation and engine
instruments were located on the instrument
panels 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. Awhip
antenna 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 bay

doors and the access hatch to the drone launch
operator's station on Tu-l6KRME'08' (c/n
1883704). Yurry Kabernik archive

Left: The dorsal intakes and outlets of the Azaliya

jammer's heat exchangers on Tu-16E Azaliya
'61 Red' (c/n 8204203) at ARZ No 12' Note the
open engine cowling and the faired dorsal
anti-collision light between the air intakes,
with three pitot heads further lorward'
Yuriy Kabernik archive

Bottom left: The starboard bomb bay door of

Tu-16KRME'08' (c/n 1883704) leatures three
outlets of the ASO-16 chaff dispenser.
Yuriy Kabernik archive

Bottom right: The faired starboard antenna of the

Siren' jammer on M-16-3'51 Red' (c/n 1882216).
Yuriy Kabernik archive



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. i.i[ '. f'

: -::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:
Data recording equipment: ln squadron service ln the event of a ditching or a belly landing
: :et of AFA-33/50M (low-altitude), AFA-33/75M the Tu-16 was retrofitted with the MSRP-12 the crew in the forward cabin could escape
:^C AFA-33/100M cameras for daylight flight data recorder (FDR). Some examples had through a hatchway in the cabin roof, while the
: -otography the KZ-63 backup FDR fitted. The primary FDR crew in the rear cabin could escape through an
. set of NAFA-3S/50 or NAFA-6/50 cameras for captures 12 parameters, including barometric emergency window in the rear glazing. The air-
- Jnt photography altitude, indicated airspeed, roll rates, vertical craft was able to remain afloat long enough for
: :ARL-I camera for photographing the screen and lateral G forces, control surface deflection the crew to use the life rafts, and its ability in this
:'ihe RBP-4 radar and throttle settings, as well as gear/flap transi- respect was significantly improved if the fuel
:'AKAFU-156N automatic swivelling camera tion and the like. The backup FDR records only had been dumped before the aircraft ditched.
-cunt (for all types of daylight cameras listed altitude, IAS and vertical G forces. Two LAS-SM five-man inflatable life rafts
aocve) which enabled two-strip vertical and An M5-61 cockpit voice recorder was retro- were carried. These were stored in special
:cljque photography; a mount for night fitted in service. Some machines had an MIZ-9 boxes in the upper part of the fuselage on the
:ameras; a camera hatch and a control panel for CVR. port side between frames 12-15 (for crew mem-
:-e hatch and the AKAFU camera mount bers in the forward cabin) and between frames
Crew Escape System 62-63 (for those in the aft cabin). On release,
-^,y one camera could be installed on the ln the event of an emergency in flight, all the dinghies were inflated by carbon dioxide
---i6 at any one time (excluding the FARL-1 crewmembers were provided with ejection from the two bottles attached to them. Each
.- ch was always fitted) and only one camera seats. These were devised in OKB-156 and this crew member had his own first-aid kit, thermos
-cunt. The photographic equipment was particular model was only used on the Tu-16. flask and emergency rations. When the crew
-:used in the fuselage (section F-3) aft of the The pilots ejected upwards. Before ejection abandoned the aircraft they took with them the
-:sewheel well. their seats were forcibly slid into the extreme aft emergency and emergency SOS radios. ln the
The bomb bay could house 24 FOTAB flare position, after which the flightdeck roof hatches 1980s the Soviet Air Force and Soviet Navy
-:mbs for recce missions flown by night. were jettisoned and the control columns folded started providing the Tu-l6s with radio bea-
Starling with c/n 6203401 , the Tu- 16 was fit- away to prevent injury. The remaining cons working with the KOSPAS search and res-
:=C with a swivelling mount for the AFA-34-OK crewmembers (navigator, WSO, gunner/radio- cue satellite system (kosmicheskaya sistema
operator and tail gunner) ejected downwards po ka avareey ny kh soodov).
=^,d AFA-42175 cameras and the AFA-BAF-4OR

:'aining camera. Aircraft from c/n 7203509 after the hatch covers below the seats had been
:rwards were fitted with an NAFA-MK/75 cam- jettisoned. The G force on ejecting upwards was Armament
:'a for night photography. 15-18 Gs, lasting 0.2 to 0.3 seconds; the initial The Tu-16 had typical bomber armament. The
Until 1957 the set of cameras fitted was ejection speed was 20-22mlsec to ensure that bomb racks, bomb hoists and the release
:ecided in squadron service, depending on the the pilots' seats cleared the vertical tail. The G and locking mechanisms for the bomb load
-eeds of the particular unit. However, that year force for those ejecting downwards was 3-5 Gs. were housed in the bomb bay between fuse-
:re following photographic equipment became Each seat had a pan attached to a movable lage frames Nos 33 and 49. The bomb bay
siandard for the Tu-16. One aircraft in every frame on which it could move along guide rails was 6.702m long. The sights, release mecha-
:hree was fitted with the AFA-34-OK, AFA- firmly secured to the fuselage. Each seat had a nisms and bomb bay door control panels were
3AF-40R and NAFA-6/50 cameras. From July base, a back, a headrest and grab handles. The located in the forward pressurised cabin. ln
:957 onwards each Tu-16 had an AFA-34-OK piston of the ejection gun was rigidly attached addition to the main bomb bay, there was a
and an AFA-42175 camera, and one aircraft in to the seat frame, and its cylinder to the fuse- compartment housing two DYa-SS box{ype
everythree had an AFA-BAF-40R and an NAFA- lage structure. The head of the piston was racks for TsOSAB coloured marker/signal flare
M K75. At the end of the 1 950s the FARL-1 was packed with a cartridge which exploded when bombs or SMAB maritime marker bombs.
replaced by the FARM-2 camera, and the the firing pin was pulled by means of a handle, Depending on the composition of the bomb
PAU-457-4 gun camera was fitted to record the creating high pressure which forced the piston load, the following racks were fitted in the
screen of the PRS-1. out, carrying the seat with it. bomb bay:

Tupolev Tu-16 99
six KD3-488 cassettetype fourshackle racks
with De13-48 shackles
four KD4-3BB two-shackle racks with De14-49
an MBD6-16 beam{ype rack with Der6-5

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 for
selecting the sequence and intervals in which
the 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 speciai
mobile 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
.# ,i
smaller bombs were carried on KD3-BB anc
KD4-2BB cassettetype racks attached to the
bomb bay walls. When the Tu-16T torpedo-
.t" bomber was used on naval theatres of opera-
r, ,,.lrlll - '
tions, carrying mines and torpedoes, the latte'
il were suspended from the KD3 and KD4 racks
The maximum load of mines and torpedoes
was 8,700k9. The alrcraft was fitted with ar
ESBR-49A electric release mechanisr
enabling single weapons or 'sticks' of bombs
mines 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 is

Iocated directly ahead of the engine air intakes,
Note the steel gun blast plates riveted to the
upper luselage skin. Yelim Gordon archive

Like the dorsal turret, the DT-7N powered

ventral turret is recessed as much as possible
to cut drag and provided with gun blast plates
protecting the fuselage skin. Yelim Gordon

The port BD-352 missile pylon of a Tu'16KSR'2'5

the retaining arms are deployed and the
maintenance cover in the middle is open. Note
the cutout in the wing flap accommodating the
pylon's rear end at maximum dellection'
Yelim Gordon

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

The Tu-16 could carry the following types of


Type Number Total weight

SAB-1 00-75 llare tb 1 ,1 52kg

FotAB-1 00-80 flare 24 1,920k9

FAB-250M46 high-explosive 24 5,253k9

FAB-250M54 24 5,660k9

FAB-500|V46 18 7,686k9

FAB-500|VI54 18 B,sB6kg

FAB-1500M46 6 8,871 kg

FAB-1500|v54 6 9,324k9

FAB-3000|vI46 2 5,963k9
FAB-3000M54 2 6,1 1 6kg

FAB-5000|vl54 1 5,220k9

= the target was not visible, bomb-aiming hydraulic system failed they could be opened FAB-9000|v54 1 9,290k9

:::id be carried out using the RBP-4 Rubidiy- by a spring-loaded mechanism. The opening FAB-250|V43 tb 4,000k9

','t.l-2 (or RBP-6, or R-1) radar. ln these and closing of the bomb bay doors was electri- FAB-5OOM43 12 5,706k9

-rs:ances bombing accuracy was increased cally controlled by the navigator. FAB-10001\i143 4 4,380k9

--:e the OPB-11R (or OPB-112) was linked to When the bombs were released using the FAB-2000N43 4 B,260kg

:-: radar sight and computed the necessary OPB sight, the bomb bay doors were opened BrAB-6000 armour-piercing 1

::-:ameters for it: the slant range, the lateral sta- immediately before release. The emergency
: sation angle and the azimuth stabilisation opening of the bomb bay doors, as part of the Mines
.- 3le. emergency jettisoning of the bomb load, was AMD.5OO 4 and 12

The dropping of bombs, mines and torpe- carried out by the navigator and the co-pilot. At\4D-1000 4 was carried out by the navigator, but The pilots operated the secondary bomb bay A[/D-2tV 6andB
:::uld also be done by the WSO (radar opera- door closing system. Kazan'-built Tu-16s up to IGD-M 8

::'; with the aid of a release switch. ln this and including c/n 5201801 had lights in the Serpei 6

-siance, all parameters for the drop had to be main gear fairings which the lead aircraft used Desna 8

:'awn up by the navigator. The bomb bay to indicate the start of bomb dropping to the Lira 8

::crs opened and closed hydraulically; if the wingmen.

HAT-52 4
45-36-IVAV 6

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 in
the bomb load. Some production Tu-16s had
ASO-16 Avtomat-1 chaff dispensers; earlier
production 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 internal

structure of the DK-7 tail turret and the
ammunition feed sleeves. Note the partially
open port side escape hatch and the ventral
access/eiection hatch. Yef im Gordon

Tupolev Tu-16 101


Also in the 1970s some Tu-16s were retrofit- station, the PS-53-BL port blister station, the The tail gunner's station, the DK-7 tail turret and
automatic devices for air gunnery (the AVS-53 the associated PRS-1 Argon-1 gun-laying radar.
ted with ASO-21 flare dispensers for releasing
The AM-23 cannon are at maximum depression
infrared countermeasures flares. Three sets automatic correction computer, the DSP-53
on this preserved aircraft, Note the port side
(six 32-round uniis) were fitted in the rear fuse- speed and density sensor, the VSP-53 escape hatch of the tail gunner's station. Only
lage and in both main gear fairings. computers for speed and density. and the the rear halves of the lateral sighting blisters are
For defence against fighter attacks the Tu-1 6 ADP-53 automatic auxiliary parallax, up to and transparencies, the forward halves being made
including c/n 4200603 the PS-48MM sighting of metal. Yefim Gordon
featured the PV-23 cannon system which con-
sisted oJ the following: stations were fitted
- the PRS-1 Argon gun ranging radar for gunnery
- seven remote-controlled Afanas'yev/Makarov under all conditions ol visibility and starboard) blister sighting posts. Auxiliary
AM-23 cannon in four positions, of which three control could be exercised from the rear sighi-
were twin-cannon powered turrets (the DT-V7 The PU-BB cannon installation was intended to ing post by the rear gunner.
dorsal barbette, DT-N7S ventral barbette and fire ahead in the direction of flight and its fixed The DK-7 had a +70'field of fire ln the hori-
DK-7 iail iurret) and one (the PU-BB mount) had cannon with 100 rounds was fitted on the star- zontal plane in the rear hemisphere, an eleva-
a single fixed forward-firing cannon board side of the nose. lt was operated by the tion of 60' and a depression of 40'. The ful
- the components ofthe remote control system for captain who used a PKI sight on a folding ammunition supply was 1,000rp9. The main
the powered turrets synchronising cannon bracket. control was from the rear sighting post by the
movement with that of the sighting position (the The three powered turrets (the DT-7V, DT- rear gunner, who was in charge of all the gur
MA-500 converter, the KS-3 and KS-4 synchro- N7s and DK-7) covered the rear hemisphere; positions. Auxiliary control could be exercisec
sensors and receivers, the SU-3R and EMU additionally, the DT-7V covered the upper part from the dorsal sighting post by ihe WSO, c'
U-700 servo-amplifiers, the DV-1 100A drive of the forward hemisphere. The field of fire of from the ventral sighting post by thE
motors, control panels, AP-10 automatic cocking the DT-7V was 360" in the horizontal plane, with gunner/radio-operator. The PRS-1 radar pe'
devices, round counters and S-13 gun camera 90" elevation and 3" depression. 500 rounds mitted fire in the rear hemisphere within +35" it-
for the PU-88) were provided (250 rounds per gun). The main the horizontal plane with an elevation anc
- the components of the sighting computer unit control of the dorsal posiiion was exercised depression of +35'.
which provided corrections to the lead angle (on from the WSO's dorsal sighting post. Auxiliary
Characteristics oi the AM-23 Cannon
examples up to and including c/n 4200603 the control could be exercised by the rear gunner
PS-48MM sighting computer unit was fjtted, from the rear sighting station.
Calibre 23mm
replaced by the PVB-53 from c/n 4200604 The DT-N7S turret had a +95" field of fire in
Weight of shell 200 grams
onwards) the horizontal plane in the rear hemisphere,
Muzzle velocity 690misec
- the optical sights - the pilot's PKI collimator 2'40' elevation and 90" depression. The full
Rate oJ fire 1,300 rounds per minute
sight for the PU-88, the PS-53-VK dorsal ammunition supply was 350rpg. Main control
Weight 43kg
sighting station, the PS-53-BP starboard blister was from the gunner/radio-operator's two (pod

102 TupolevTu-16
Chapter Eight

The Tu-l6 in Service

--= first production Tu-16 bombers began to the decade had become the DA's standard sharply until, between Mach 0.87 and 0.9, it
;-::: squadron service with the Soviet Air bomber type. lt retained this position until the became neutral, and was then lost as speed
::-:e (WS -Voyenno-vozdooshnyye see/y) in mid-1980s when it was gradually replaced by was increased further. This induced a reverse
=.::uary-March 1954. During the May Day the third-generation long-range supersonic roll reaction to rudder inputs (that is, the aircraft
- i-ade in Moscow that year a formation of nine f u-22M. This dominating position also rolled right instead of left when left rudder was
---:6s passed over Red Square. extended to the Soviet Naval Air Arm for the applied).
-: the beginning of the 1950s the piston- same reasons. The Tu-16 remained in service During squadron service, the following indi-
;-: ned Tu-4 was the backbone of the Soviet until 1994. Several air regiments equipped with cated airspeed limits were imposed:
-:avy bomber force (DA). The introduction of the Tu-16 never made the transition to the
i- aircraft belonging to a new generation - or, f u-22M after the disintegration of the USSR in - 645km/h with an all-up weight of 70 to 75.8
-::e accurately the new jet era - demanded late 1991. tonnes at altitudes up to 7,000m
:-:rges in the Long-Range Aviation's order of The Tu-16 was induced into squadron ser- - 685km/h with an all-up weight of 55 to 70 tonnes
: the fundamentals of its operational train- vice rapidly, successfully and without any at altitudes up to 6,250m
- and radical improvements to its airfield net-
3. undue difficulties thanks to the thought which - 700km/h with an all-up weight of 55 tonnes or
::k and supply system. The significant had gone into its design and the shrewd choice less at altitudes up to 6,000m
:=erences between the Tu-4 and Tu-16, par- of stability and handling attributes under differ- - 420kmlh at all altitudes with the undercarriage
:..;larly in speed, called for a modernisation of ent flying conditions. At cruising speeds the extended
.. sting airfields - concrete runways had to be gradient of stick forces was within the accepl
=:'=ngthened and extended, taxying strips and able limits for heavy aircraft (30-1 00kg). At high The maximum permissible IAS with the flaps
:::king areas reorganised. New storage facili- Mach numbers they increased more steeply: at deployed was 400kmih with 20" flap and
-:s were built for fuel and lubricants to cope an altitude of 10,000m with a speed equivalent 340km/h with flaps set at greater angles. The
.r :h the large quantities of kerosene required to Mach 0.9 and a centre of gravity al21%MAC maximum landing gear transition speed was
:-C airbases were provided with new radio the stick forces reached 120-130k9 and han- set at 400km/h lAS.
::mmunications systems and navigation aids. dling became more difficult. The Tu-16 was sta- In its 40 years of service the Tu-16 equipped
lnitially heavy bombers were parked in long ble up to Mach 0.83, with some instability, but many air regiments of the Soviet Air Force and
':,ys on the flightlines. The Tu-16 gained the not causing too much trouble, appearing at the Soviet Navy. Most of these regiments had
: stinction of being the DA's first type to use speeds of Mach 0.83-0.87. At Mach 0.87 the air- previously operated piston-engined aircraft,
: spersed parking in earthen revetments craft became stable once more - in fact signifi- but some were newly organised as jet bomber
,',nich were sometimes covered with camou- cantly more stable than at lower speeds. units. ln the course of theTu-16's service career
'=ge netting) to minimise vulnerability to air The aircraft's highest Mach number deter- some of the units operating it were disbanded,
-ards and missile strikes. The appearance of mined by its longitudinal stability and controlla- others re-equipped with new aircraft, and there
:-e Tu-16 requlred a complete overhaul of all bility was limited to 0,9 at altitudes up to were some which, after operating more mod-
. rlields used by the Long-Range Aviation - all 10,000m. Higher speeds below l0,000m gave ern machines for a while, reverted once more to
,rere upgraded to 1st class, and often to an rise to an inadmissible increase in all control the Tu-16.
: ren higher grade, able to take practically any forces and the machine became to all intents The Tu-16 served in roughly equal numbers
' nd of aircraft, including the main Soviet strate- and purposes uncontrollable. The Tu-16 could with the Long-Range Aviation and the Naval Air
; c bomber, the Tu-95. Civil airfields equipped only exceed Mach 0.9 in a dive from 10,000- Arm. By the early 1960s the Tu-16 completely
:l these standards did not come into being until 13,000m in order to evade SAMs.
:re end ofthe 1950s. As far as lateral stability was concerned, the
The personnel of a Soviet Air Force heavy
ln the mid-1950s the Tu-16 was already aircraft behaved normally at speeds up to Mach bomber regiment equipped with Tu-16s lined up
:eing built in large quantities and by the end of 0.8. At higher speeds lateral stability declined for an inspection, Yefim Gordon archive

Tupolev Tu-16 103

replaced the Tu-4 in DA service. In AVMF regi- sion). The TBAD could consist of two, only very an effective strike presence on the most impor-
ments it replaced the Tu-14T torpedo-bomber occasionally three, heavy bomber air regi- tant sectors of potential theatres. The Tu-16
and, to a certain extent, the lL-28T torpedo- ments (TBAP - tyazhelobombardirovochnyy kept its functions in this respect virtually until
bomber and lL-2BR photo reconnaissance air- aviapolk, = Bomber Wing, Heavy). lndepen- the end of the 1 980s.
craft. The table below shows which versions of dent heavy bomber air regiments and divisions The first DA air regiments to be equipped
the Tu-16 saw service with the DA and the AVMF: were attached to independent air corps with the Tu-16 in early 1954 (and subsequently
(OTBAK - otdel'nW tyazhelobombardi- the Tu-1 6A) were the 402nd TBAP based at Bal-
Version Long-RangeAviation Naval AirArm rovochnyy aviakorpoos), which in 1980 were basovo near Orsha and the 203rd TBAP at
grouped into the Air Armies of the Supreme Baranovichi (both Belorussia), which com-
Tu-1 6 + +
Command (VA VGK - vozdooshnaya armiya prised the 45th TBAD. Subsequently produc-
tu-tbA + + Verkhovnovo glavnokomahndovaniya). fhe tion examples entered service with the air
Tu-1 6 (Z) + + Long-Range Aviation consisted of either two or regiment based at Engels-2 AB near Saratov,
Tu-1 6N + three air armies. When the DA was dissolved, southern central Russia, Concurrently, several
Tu-1 6T + its air armies came directly under Air Force were supplied to the special Long-Range Avia-
Tu-16S (SP) + (WS) command. (ln the modern Russian Air tion unit based at Bagherovo AB which was
Tu-1 6R + + Force, the Long-Range Aviation has re- involved in the nuclear weapons development
Tu-1 6RP + emerged as the 37th VA VGK.) programme. Soon large numbers of Tu-16
Tu-1 6 Yolka + + By the end of the 1 950s the Long-Range Avi- were available for service with the DA units and
Tu-1 6E + + ation's heavy bomber air regiments and inde- then with the AVMF. Tu-16R reconnaissance
Tu-1 6SPS + + pendent long-Range reconnaissance air aircraft began to reach the independent long-
Tu-16P Buket + regiments (ODRAP - otdel'nyy dahl'niy range reconnaissance air regiments and the
Tu-1 6BR + razvedwatel'nyy aviapolk) were equipped with Tu-16SPS (and later Tu-16P Buket) ECM ver-
Tu-1 6KS + + the Tu-1 6, Tu-1 64, Tu-1 6SPS, Tu-1 6 Yolka and sions were supplied to the independent ECM
Tu-1 6KSR-2 + + Tu-16R. The task of the heavy bomber air regi- air regiments (OAP REP).
Tu-1 6KSR-2-1 1 + + ments was to carry out bombing raids deep into By the start of the 1960s several dozen
Tu-16K-1116 + + enemy territory, and to photograph the results Tu-16s in various versions were serving with
Tu-1 6KSR-2-5 + + of bombing raids and objects of opportunity en the DA and the AVMF. At various times, the
Tu-1 6K"26 + + route to and from the target area. The recon- following Tu-16 regiments were based at the
Tu-1 6K-1 0 + naissance regiments were to carry out visual following bases:
Tu-1 6K-1 0-26 + reconnaissance and Elint missions by day or
Tu-16RlV night in their support. Their ECM-equipped air- - in the western regions of the USSR: at Tartu in
Tu-16R1\']"1 & RM-2 craft, the Tu-16SPS, Tu-16 Yolka and Tu-16E, Estonia (Baltic Defence District), at Sol'tsy in the
were to be employed as required against Novgorod Region (Leningrad DD), ShaikovkaAB
The Tu-16KRM drone launcher and the M-16 strong enemy anti-aircraft defences. near Moscow and Migalovo AB near Kalinin
target drone were operated by the Long-Range During the 1960s some of the Long-Range (both Moscow DD) [Kalinin has been renamed
Aviation, the Air Defence Force and the Naval Aviation's bomber regiments converted to ASM back to Tver'l
Alr Arm for air defence training. carrying versions of the Tu-16 for operations - in the Belorussian DD: at Baranovichi, Bobruisk

Tu-16 regiments could be either part of a against surface vessels and strategic land tar- (two regiments), Machulishchi AB near Minsk
heavy bomber air division IBAD - tyazh- gets ln the European, Asian and Pacific the- and Zyabrovka AB near Gomel'
el o bo m bard i r ovoc h n aya av i ad iveeziy a, rou g hly atres. The later availability of more modern - in the Ukraine: at Belaya Tserkov', Nezhin,

equivalent to a Bomber Group (Heavy) in the versions of the Tu-16 with more sophisticated Priluki. Poltava (two regiments), Ozyornoe AB
US Air Force) or independent (that is, direct and powerful ECM (the Tu-16P Buket and the near Zhitomir. and also at Stryy AB
reporting units not forming part of an air divi- like) enabled the Long-Range Aviation to retain - inthe eastern regions of the USSR: at BelayaAB

in the lrkutsk Region (Transbaikalian DD, two
regiments). Zavitinsk in the Amur Region,

tF u#ffi:mru.=
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 port

wing and stabiliser is used as a teaching aid at
one of the Soviet Air Force's technical schools:
here, an instructor in the rank ol Lieutenant
Colonel explains the aircraft's design details to
the cadets. One of ihe eiection seats is
displayed separately lor ease ol inspection. The
,Anll r'1 tactical code'42'is still carried on the starboard
air intake cover. Yefim Gordon archive
fl ffi,l
I Opposite page: Escorted by two US Navy
McDonnell F-4Js (and probably photographed
from a third), Soviet Navy Tu-16R'30 Red' (c/n
1882309?) maintains a close interest in the
aircraft carrier USS Cora, Sea (CV 63). The
Tu-16R is a Badger-E with SRS-I and SRS-4
blister fairings but no SRS-3 underwing pods.
US Navy

104 Tupolev Tu-16



I cmmand and those in the eastern military dis- The type also saw service with the air compo- The Tu-16 equipped the minelayer and tor-
:'cts one air army. After the dissolution of the nent of the Air Defence Force (PVO) alPriozy- pedo-bomber regiments (MTAP - minno-tor'
orsk, Kazakhstan. pednyy aviapolk) and maritime missile strike air
- SSR there was only a single such formation in
,r estern Russia. ln addition to the airfields listed above, Tu-16 regiments (MRAP - morskoy raketonosnyy avi-
units were based at various times at Mozdok apolk) of the Naval Air Arm which were either
'.aval Air Arm Tu-16s were based as follows: (lngushetia, North Caucaslan DD), Engels-2 components of air divisions (MTAD - minno-
AB. Skomorokhi AB, Oktyabr'skoe AB, and torpednaya aviadiveeziya or MRAD - morskaya
- rvith the Black Sea Fleet at Kool'baklno AB near Vesyolaya AB, as well as at other locations. raketonosnaya aviadiveeziya) or independent.
Nikolayev, plus Novofyodorovka AB near Saki The Tu-16 was also used by two of the These divisions and independent regiments
and Gvardeyskoe AB on the Crimea Peninsula Soviet Air Force's training establishments: made up the fleet air arms of the Soviet Navy.
(all three Red Banner Odessa DD) the Chelyabinsk Military Navigator College ln 1956 the then Soviet Defence Minister
- with the Baltic Fleet at Kaliningrad (Baltic DD), (WAU Sh - Vyss heye voy enn oye av i ats i on n oy e Marshal Gheorgiy K Zhukov signed an order by
Ostrov AB near Pskov (Leningrad DD) and at oochilischche shtoormanov), operating from which the Soviet Naval Air Arm was equipped
Bykhov AB (Belarus', two regiments) Kamensk-Ural'skiy, Shadrinsk and Kustanai, with the Tu-16. These were mainly 'landlubber'
- with the Norlh Fleet at Severomorsk-3 AB near and the Tambov Military Pilot College (WAUL - (that is, not specialised naval) versions, with only
Murmansk, Olenegorsk AB near Arkhangel'sk Vyssheye voyennoye aviatsionnoye oochilis- a few Tu-16KS and Tu-16T aircraft designed
and at Lakhta AB in the Karelian Autonomous chche lyotchikov). lt was also used extensively specifically for naval service at first. lt was
SSR by research and development establishments: intended that they should be flown by aircrew
- with the Pacific Fleet at Knevichi AB (two by the main facility of the Soviet Air Force with some experience of overwater operations.
regiments) and Khorol'AB in the Primor'ye Research lnstitute (GK NIIWS) at Vladimirovka The plan envisaged supplying the North
Region, at Mai-Gatka AB, Mongokhta AB, AB near Akhtubinsk, the Ministry of Aircraft Fleet with 85 Tu-16s in 1956, a further 170
Kamennyy Roochey AB near Sovetskaya Gavan' lndustry's Flight Research lnstitute (Lll) and going to the Black Sea Fleet and Pacific Fleet
(all Khabarovsk region) and Yelizovo airport near by the Tupolev Design Bureau at Zhukovskiy. the following year. The Baltic Fleet was to be
Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy on the Kamchatka After their retirement from service, Tu-16 air- the last, receiving 170 Tu-16s in 1958. Thus,
Peninsula craft were kept at the Soviet Air Force storage over the course of three years, the Naval Air
- with the Caspian Sea Flottilla - near Shevchenko base at Chagan, Semipalatinsk Reglon, Kaza- Arm would have 424 Tu-16s, just slightly less
Inow renamed Aktau], Kazakhstan khstan. 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- crews went through an elitensive theoretical had carried out five practice torpedo attacks.
what differently. The first examples were in fact tralning course lasting some 400 to 500 hours, two with RAT-52 practice torpedoes. Alter this.
supplied to the Baltic Fleet. This was because and the flight crews were subjected to a rigorous the Tu-16T was delivered to other naval units:
in 1955 the 57th TBAD comprising two regi- selection process. The Tu-16 was at that time the sth MTAP was equipped: in April 1956, the
ments o1 Tu-4 bombers had been transferred considered the very latest in aviation technology 124th MTAP following suit in June, the 943rcj
from the Long-Range Aviation to the Naval Air and the best aircrew were chosen to fly ii. ln the MTAP in May 1957 and the 574th MTAP in
Arm where it was redesignated the 57th MTAD Naval Air Arm, Tu-16 captains were strictly Pilots November. Gradually, other units of the Naval
The division's aircrews had been well trained, 1st Class (an official grade reflecting experience Air Arm were re-equipped.
but their obsolescent Tu-4 bombers were not and expertlse) with no less than 600-700 hours Unlike the lL-2BT and Tu-l4T, which coulc
suited to Naval Air Arm requirements. Since the on the lL-28 or Tu-14, and for co-pilots the qual- only carry two torpedoes, the Tu-16T coulc
division was stationed in one of the 'hottest' ifying level was no less than 200 hours. take up to six torpedoes. Theoretical studies
sectors of the Cold War, it was decided it The first version to enter service with the indicated that the probability of hitting a surface
should have priority in receiving new aircraft. Baltic Fleet was the baseline bomber, but with ship when four torpedoes were launched was
Some of the Tu-4s were handed down to the the start of production and conversion of the increased by amere2-3/owhen compared witt-
Naval Air Arm training centre at Nikolayev- minelayeritorpedo-bomber version the Baltic a single-torpedo attack. Experience with the
Kool'bakino, others converted into transports, Fleet air regiments began training on the Tu-16T proved that its operational radius was
and some high{ime examples scrapped. The Tu-16T. The Tu-16KS missile strike variant significantly greater and its equipment more
division's command staff, flight and ground joined the Northern and Pacific Fleets, at first sophisticated than that of the lL-28T or Tu-147
crews were sent to factories for Tu-'l 6 conver- augmenting the Tu-4KS and then completely therefore, different tactics could be employec
sion training. replacing it. The Tu-16T was to be used predominantly a:
The Naval Air Arm took delivery of its first four In June-July 1956 the first Tu-16T torpedo- night and in adverse weather to strike selectec
Tu-16s on 1st June 1955 and on 25th June the bombers were supplied to the 57th MTAD, and enemy vessels. The probability of hitting th:
57th MTAD made its first training flights. The by September nine crews of its 240th MTAP target was to be increased by 50-100% b.
launching the torpedoes in a fan-like spreac
although in practice this method of torpec:
attack was not used.

The Good, the Bad (it's up to the reader to

decide which is which) and the Double Ugly. The
same Badger-E and the same F-4J-32-MC BuNo
15839114367'NH' in an interesting formation
with a Vought F-8A Crusader. US Navy

More action over the sea in a different part ol

the world as Tu-16SPS'91 Blue'is escorted
away from its 'target' by a pair of Royal Navy
British Aerospace Sea Harrier FRS.1s. The
Badger's tail cannon are in the lully up position
to avoid incidents; it is a standing rule during
such encounters that neither aircraft may use
the 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 their service lives, Most of the tankers were
-:: by all four Soviet fleets, the last of these land and naval exercises, and the Tu-16R was converted into ASM carriers. A whole series of
-- :he Black Sea Fleet in 1959. Each of the regularly used to follow the movements and regiments lost their tankers, despite the fact
that almost all combat versions of the Tu- 16, as
-- 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 well as reconnaissance and ECM versions,
l,- ng the exercises the aircraft took off from couple of Tu-16Rs were normally assigned to were IFR-capable. One regiment at Poltava, the
--:aved airfields with their maximum take-off this in the 1960s: one fitted with an SPS-1
jam- 226th lndependent ECM Air Regiment, con-
lnt. The torpedoes
toroedoes were released in a sin- mer and the other with SRS-3 ELINT sets This sisted solely of ECM versions - the Tu-16E and
= 3rt.
: cass, using optical sighting. ln 1960 as a was to ensure the comprehensive coverage of various versions of the Tu-16P, including sev-
::-lt of Khrushchov'sfar-reaching cutbacks in all the possible radar frequencies used by the eral with the Cactus system. ln 1986 this regi-
::. et air power, minelayer and torpedo- NATO vessels. When the Tu-16RM-1 and ment was disbanded, leaving a single ECM
::-:ber units were to all intents and purposes Tu-16RM-2 entered Soviet Navy service they, squadron. lndependent reconnaissance air
: rrnated.Almostall regimentsequippedwith too, were used in these operations. ln the regiments operated tankers and ECM versions
'- tL-2BT (the Tu-1 4T was by then no longer in 1 960s and 1 97Os Western aviation publications in addition to reconnaissance machines. The
.:-.,,ce) were disbanded and their aircraft were full of photographs of Soviet Tu-1 6s on Tu-1 6N tanker using the probe and drogue sys-
:::cmmissioned and broken up. ln the Pacific which the 'R and 'RM versions were shown fly- tem equipped one squadron (the fourth) in the
= :.i alone some 400 aircraft were scrapped in ing over the decks of American and British air-
200th GvTBAP (Gvardeyskiy tyazhelobom-
: snod time; such devastation had not been craft carriers. bardirovochnyy aviapolk - Guards Heavy
: --ered by the Naval Air Arm even in the dark- Outside the USSR, Soviet Navy Tu-16s were Bomber Air Regiment) based at Bobruisk and
.:: days of the Great Patriotic War. Only the stationed ln Vieinam. Tu-16R reconnaissance later at Belaya Tserkov'.
---16 in its various versions remained as the aircraft and Tu-1 6P ECM versions flew from Naval air regiments had an even more varie-
:: e heavy combat aircraft in naval air service. Cam Ranh AB in southern Vietnam (Da Nang gated mix of aircraft. As well as the versions
Cn 20th March 1 961 some of the Tu-1 6 naval Province) in the 1 970s and early 1 980s. Stud- they had in common with the Long-Range Avi-
- :egiments remaining in service were redes- ies were made at this time on the effects of the ation, they also possessed purely naval air ver-
;:ated naval missile strike air regiments by prolonged effects of thetropical climate's heat sions: the Tu-16K-10 missile carrier, the
:-ler of the Soviet Ministry of Defence. This and humidity on the aircraft's airframe, equip- Tu-16RM-1 and Tu-16RM-2 spyplanes, the
'='.ected the actual state of affairs, since by this ment and electrical wiring. Tu- 1 6T torpedo-bomber, the Tu-1 65 SAR ver-
-e they had been re-equipped to a consider- Various versions of the Tu-16 served with air sion and the Tu-16PLO ASW version. The
::ie degree with the Tu- 1 6KS. As well as this, regiments at different times. A regiment usually Tu-16T was the basic element of minelayer and
-: K-10 anti-shipping weapons system com- consisted of three squadrons, equipped at first torpedo-bomber units and the Tu-1 6K-10 of the
:. 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 missile strike units. With the conversion of the
::gun to enter service in ever-increasing num- entered service, the regiment might consist Tu-16T into the Tu-165 and Tu-16PLO, these
::rs. The remaining Tu-1 6T torpedo-bombers solely of this version or of one Tu- 1 6KS squad- latter versions were operated by ASW units.
.,,ere almost all converted into the Tu-165 ronandtwosquadronsof bombers.Thenum- Thus, the Tu-16 with its initial mass produc-
::arch and rescue version which stayed in ber of versions in a regiment rose with the tion and introduction into squadron service
Scviet Navy service for a considerable time. On advent of in-flight refuelling. Normally the first became the standard machine in both the
26th January 1966 the Soviet Council of Minls- two squadrons flew bomber or missile strlke Long-Range Aviation and Naval Air Arm. This
::rs authorised the transfer of six Tu-16T air- versions, including those with IFR capability, gave rise to a number of problems associated
:.aft, apparently the last machines of their kind, while the third operated tankers. With the with aircrew training and, after some years, with
:t the United Arab Republic. appearance of ECM versions, these were usu- repair and maintenance issues.
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
,', 1 961 individual launches
ay. and by August of 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 A pair of Tu-16R Badger-Fs coded '02 Red' and
rus fleet air arms. Soon afterwards, exercises squadrOns flew combat versions. '37 Red' make a formation llypast during the
open doors day at Kubinka AB on 1 1th April
:volving groups of the new ASM carriers ln the early 1970s the number of Tu-16 (Z) 1992.'O2 Fed' is additionally equipped with a
against convoys of ships began, and before tankers in squadron service declined as the Siren' jammer in a UKhO tail fairing; missions
cng many naval missile strike air regiments requirement for wingto-wing refuelling were often llown by such mixed pairs of
rad acquired familiarity with the K-l0. Recon- changed and the aircraft reached the end of differently conligured aircraft. Yefim Gordon

Tupolev Tu-16 107

The Combat & Conversion Training Centres service sergeant and warrant officer ranks). Ryazan', Tartu, Baranovlchi and Staraya
(TsBP i PLS - Isenfr boyevoy podgotovki i Radio operators/gunners who had qualified Roossa were also involved in the repair and
pereoochivaniya lyotnovo sosfahva) bore the at sergeants' schools and had been trained to maintenance of the Tu-16.
main responsibility for preparing aircrews. meet the requirements for Radio Operator 3rd As well as repairs, the aircraft repair plants
These centres were established in Ryazan' Class after two flights on the Tu-4UShS trainer (ARZ) carried out more far-reaching work. ln
(Dyagilevo AB) for the Long-Range Aviation were appointed as radio operators/gunners on the 1960s series production of the Tu-16 came
and in Nikolayev (Kool'bakino AB) for the Naval the Tu-16. Usually these were national service to an end and later types of aircraft, Ihefu-22
Air Arm. The centres were supplied with early sergeants (until the mid-1950s, the conscrip- and Tu-95, were built at their former production
production examples of the Tu-16 for aircrew tion term the Soviet Air Force was five years, factories. The ARZs, therefore, bore responsi-
training. At first the specially converted during which tlme outstanding flight and bility for carrying out modifications to those
Tu-4UShS navigator trainers fitted with Tu-16 ground crew personnel were trained). Tu-16s still in squadron service. During repair
sighting and navigation equipment were used Flying instructors were trained within the and maintenance, aircraft were re-equipped.
for navigator training. Several regiments had operational units under the authority of the ln this way the missile carriers for the K-11.
this machine and it remained in service untilthe regimental commander and the control of the K-16, K-26 and K-26P, the Tu-16RM-1 and
early 1960s. divisional commander. Bombardier and navi- Tu-16RM-2 reconnaissance versions, the ECM
When units converted to the new bomber or gational instruction were allocated to leading versions with Azaliya, Ficus and Cactus jam-
missile carrier versions of the Tu-16, crew com- navigation personnel who had gained top mers, the Tu-16N tanker, the target drone
manders (captains) were appointed and grades in navigation and bomb-aiming as nav- launchers, the M-16 target drones and other
trained from the following personnel: igators or co-navigators. versions of the Tu-16 came into being. Repair
As the number of aircraft in squadron service and maintenance of the Tu-16 at Belaya
- captains of Tu-l4 crews increased, so did the need for aircrews. The Tserkov' continued until 1985, at Orsha until
- IL-28 pilots trained in all-weather day and visual Soviet Air Force Command decided therefore 1980 and at Khabarovsk until 1992 in which
flight rules night flying to give initial training directly to aircrew cadets year all further work on re-equipping and over-
- co-pilots who had qualified on the Tu-16 with no in military schools. The training of navigators hauling the Tu-16 ended.
less than 150 hours flying time was inaugurated at the Chelyabinsk WAUSh ln the late 1980s and early 1990s the Tu-16 s
- captains of military transport aircraft trained to a and the training of pilots at the Tambov WAUL. designated service life was 35 years, but the
set minimum in all-weather flying by day and night. Those qualifying from their schools were decision was then taken to extend this to 38
appointed WSOs and assistants to crew com- years. ln 1990-1991 a number of machines dat-
Pilots accepted for conversion training on the manders when they were posted to an air regi- ing from 1955-56 were refurbished and modi-
Tu-16 as crew commanders had to have at ment. After obtaining a set standard, they fied as target drones at ARZ-12 at Khabarovsk
least 800 hours flying time, a good or excellent became navigators and crew commanders. The last conversion work took place in 1992
grasp of piloting skills and an unblemished ser- The centres in Ryazan' (43rd TsBP i PLS) and when five Tu-16s built in 1957 were modifiec
vice record. Nikolaev (33rd TsBP i PLS) specialised in the as target drones. After the dissolution of the
Tu-16 navigators were selected from the training of commanders, and subsequently USSR, there were no funds available to main-
following: they trained captains for other types of aircraft tain old hardware, let alone replace it.
in service with the DA and AVMF the Tu-22, The Tupolev OKB kept an eye on all Tu-l6
- Tu-4 navigators with navigational and Tu-95 and fu-22M. aircraft during the first phase of their squadror
bombardier experience in all-weather conditions The Tu-124Sh-1 was a version of the service. The slightest fault with the airframe o-
by day and fine weather conditions by night at fu-124V short-haul airliner specially modified its systems, or with its equipment, was rectifiec
medium and high altitudes for navigator training in the Long-Range Avia- and, if necessary, the findings applied to aiL
- co-navigators on the Tu-4 who had successfully tion. lt was fitted with the bomb-aiming and craft in service and on the production line. The
carried practice operational flights on the Tu-16 flight instrumentation of the bomber, and later initial perlod of squadron service was almos:
the missile strike versions, of the Tu-16. They trouble{ree, and the few accidents that dic
Co-navigators were appointed from: were used in the training regiments at the occur were investigated and the causes dis-
Chelyabinsk WAUSh and also for training covered; measures were then taken to ensure
- Tu-4 weapons systems operators with pilots at the Tambov WAUL, since the aircraft that they did not reoccur in future. Some of the
navigational and bombardier experience by day was similar to the Tu-16 in its handling charac- typical and serious accidents are detailed belor',
and night at medium and high altitudes terlstics. Later these two schools, the most The first loss of an operational Tu-16 too,
- Tu-4 assistant navigators with navigational and important ones for training navigators and place even before the off icial acceptance of th-
bombardier experience by day and night at pilots for the Long-Range Aviation, were sup- aircraft into service. On 6th April 1954 Tu-16 c '
medium and high altitudes and who had passed plied with actual examples of the Tu-16 to opti- 4200202 (tactical code unknown) ofthe 402n:
their preliminary evaluation for the Tu-16 mise aircrew training. Heavy Bomber Air Regiment crashed near r::
- navigators who had qualified at Long-Range Ground crews were trained in military avia- home base of Balbasovo near Orsha. Ti^:
Aviation operational training schools as tion technical schools (VATU - voyennoye cause was an uncommanded deflection of tha
navigator-operators aviatsionno-tekhnicheskye oochilischche). elevator trim tab. On 30th January 1955 th:
Specialists on airframes, engines and aviation nose gear unit of Tu-16 cln 4201302 collapse:
Co-pilots for the Tu-16 were chosen from: equipment were trained at the lrkutsk VATU, on landing at the GK Nll WS airfield -
those specialising in armament at the Achinsk Akhtoobinsk. On 19th August 1955 Tu-l:
- co-pilots on the Tu-4 VATU, and radar specialists in Tambov. 'No802' (that is, cln 4200802?) crashed at a-
- pilots who had qualified on jet aircraft at frontal ln this way the requirement for qualified per- airfield near Poltava when the AP-5-2M autop-
bomber aviation flying schools sonnel for the Long-Range Aviation and Naval lot failed. On lBth April 1956 Tu-16K-10 c '
Air Arm was met. The repair and maintenance 5202 (full cin unknown) was damaged beyon:
Defensive fire commanders (chief gunners) problems were met by the DA's aircraft over- repair at Priluki AB. A previous hard landing
and senior radio operators were selected from haul plants in Khabarovsk, Orsha and Belaya had caused a weakness in the lower stringe'.
radio operators/gunners trained for the Tu-16 Tserkov', while AVMF aircraft were repaired near frame18, and the forward fuselage brok:
and possessing a qualification no lower than and refurbished in Nikolayev and Artyom (near away at frame 20 when the pilot put tt-:
second class (national service and extended Vladivostok). Aircraft repair factories in machine down short of the runway.

108 Tupolev Tu-16


-: : , e: This view clearly shows the characteristic

i-shaped ioint line between the Tu-16K'10's r*1
duck 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 lor
access 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 passes

over the aircralt carrier HMS Atk Royal, showing ;{iTki$:r. "
tie ventral radomes. Jane's Allthe World's Aircraft
i. I i 'lii 'i; I I I I

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 t-
' 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 *i.h ,t
sieeply over St Basil's Cathedral. Nyukhtikov ',,4,t"&p6lffill#l}";
saw clearly how impossible this was; yet he had ,dl

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 'i **lt"'" *
,vas so dramatic that no one remembered to t,,} di.: *,,1

ask why the pilot had not carried out his order
io the letter.
,{,i il,.}r, '
Air traffic control incompetence was some- $h, St..qtqr
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 lli':it'rP
30th VA/ssth TBAD/3O3rd TBAP crashed near

Tupolev Tu-16 109

ln Soviet times great care was taken to maintain
serviceability and keep up combat training. This
Tu-l6K-10 coded'55 Red' wears the'Excellent
Aircraft' maintenance award badge (a stylised
aircraft silhouette incorporated into the Soviet
'Quality mark' pentagon) and three'kill' stars
marking successlul missile launches against
practice targets. Note the very dirty underside
of the nose, probably a result of minute rubber
particles separating lrom the nosewheel tyres
on touchdown. YeIim Gordon archive

staff of the polar station and the technician left to
guard 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 winds
Zavitinsk after colliding with an Aeroflot/Far these were not intended for heavy bomber and currents began to cany the polar station
Eastern Civil Aviation Directorate An-24RV twin- operations; on take-ofi and landing, clods of towards the Greenland Sea that the decision
turboprop airliner registered CCCP-46653 (c/n earth or chunks of ice could be ingested bythe was taken to destroy the alrcraft after all sal-
47309204). The collision, which occurred in aircraft's englnes, damaging them. vageable equipment and engines had been
thick overcast (the pilots did not see each ln the second hall of the 1950s it was removed. As early as September 1958 the Tu-1 6
other's aircraft and were unable to take evasive decided to use ice fioe airfields in the Arctic to had been spotted by a Royal Canadian Air Force
action), was due to poor interaction between increase the operational capabilities of the reconnaissance aircraft and the Western press
civil and military ATC authorities which had Long-Range Aviation. This turned out to be no began to make noises about the setting up of
(unbeknownst to each other) cleared both air- easy matter since the landing weight of loaded Soviet strategic bases on neutral tenitory rela-
craft to use the same flight level. The bomber's strategic bombers was around 70-95 tonnes. tively close to the American continent.
crew perished; so did all occupants of the While the bomber's weight could not break While stripping the Tu-16 down, the technl-
An-24 except one. lncredibly, a female passen- through the ice, which was many metres thick, cal crew had to use an LAS-SM inflatable
ger survived a fall from high altitude after being the aircraft could skld off the runway when it dinghy to reach it due to the melting ice. Once
thrown clear of the aircraft as it disintegrated; braked on landing. Added to this, the ice's high the engines and equipment had been recov-
fortuitously, she landed in a deep snowdrift, salt content made lts surface friable, and the ered, the airframe was doused with kerosene
suffering nothing worse than bruises! lnterest- vibration induced on take-off and landing was and set alight. The personnel from the dritting
ingly, at the time of the crash the Tu-16 was so violent that it was impossible to read the polar station, the technician and the disman-
using the ATC callsign CCCP-07514; in reality instruments properly. tling crew were evacuated to the mainland. Fo'
this registration belonged to an An-2TP utillty ln April 1958 A Krotov, Commander of the his 'lengthy secondment' technician R Kagilo',
aircraft (c/n 1G 15242) built ln December 1973. 52nd TBAP, was ordered to prepare his three was given a substantial reward and leave. Afte-
Test pilots managed to save the Tu-16 on best aircrews for Arctic flights, including landing this, no more landings by the Tu-16 were maoe
more than one occasion. ln the mid-1 950s a test on an ad hoc ice airstrip in poor weather condi- on ice strips in the Arctic, although for various
crew from plant No 1 in Kuibyshev was ordered tions. Colonel A Alekhnovich, a Hero of the reasons some unplanned landings on the ic3
to determine the maximum permissible G load Soviet Union and Vice-Commander of the 45th did take place.
for a Tu-16 bomber. At the time, the methodol- TBAD to which the 52nd TBAP was subordi- Altogether between 1954 and 1956 te^
ogy for this lagged behind the skills in handling nated, was appointed to head the mission. Tu-16 were lost in fatal and nonjatal crashes
the aircraft itself and on reaching the prescribed Shortly aftenruards more detailed orders were The worst attrition in the Tu-16's service caree'
G load the aircraft stalled, entering a spin. The issued. Two aircraft (a Tu-16 and a Tu-95) were was between 1957 and 1960 when about te'
commander ejected ahead of the other crew to fly towards the North Pole and effect a landing machines were lost each year. Then the acc -
members, but was killed immediately afterwards on ice in the vicinity of the SP-6 drifting polar dent rate fell sharply; in the 'sixties and 'seven-
when he was struck by a hatch cover released research station; a third aircraft was to remain at ties the average annual attrition was one or twc
by another member of the crew as he exited the Tiksi until further notice. The two aircraft landed On 15th July 1964 a Tu-16R crew reporte:
aircraft The co-pilot, Aleksandr Kazakov, man- safely on the ice. The Tu-16 piloted by sighting an American carrier group 200km i:
aged to recover from the spin, exceeding all Alekhnovich and the Tu-95 piloted by Major N the east ofthe Japanese coast. Afterthis, notr--
speed and G load limits in the process. He had Bazarnyy were the world's first heavy aircrafi to ing more was heard from the aircraft; ther:
thus unwittingly tested the airJrame's strength. land on Arctic ice. But during take-off the Tu-16 were no survivors among the crew of seven. O-
Special tests were carried out on a number veered off the runway; the take-off was aborted 25th May 1 968 another Tu-1 6R reconnaissanc:
of examples. ln 1956 Lt Col G Yaglov landed a but the bomber's starboard wing struck a Polar aircraft was lost near NeMoundland after ove'-
Tu-16 for the first time on an unpaved runway, Aviation lL-1 4transport parked nearby -the pilot flying the aircraft carrier USS Essex. There wa:
after which take-oifs and landings were made only just managed to avert a fatal accident. a suspicion that the aircraft had been shc:
on a regular basis, using sparsely equipped Both aircraft were seriously damaged. The down by the US Navy air defences immediate .
auxiliary airstrips in the tundra and on the Arc- repair crew which arrived two weeks later could after reporting the location of an America-
tic ice without any adverse consequences. not repair the Tu-16 on site - in Arctic field con- destroyer, but this allegation was refuted by th:
ln the mid-1950s only a few aidields in the ditions the job proved to be beyond their capa- Americans. Wreckage from the aircraft cc -
Soviet Arctic, such as Amderma, Severomorsk, bilities. Nor could the machine could be dumped lected during the ensuing search and rescu=
Chekurovka, Wrangel lsland and one or two into the ocean, as the ice floe was ringed by ice operation was transferred to the Sov'::
others, were suitable for heavy bombers. A hummocks some 16 to 20 metres high. destroyer with the tactical number '31 1'.
special operations group was formed in the News of the accident was kept secret; offi- By the end of 1981, 106 examples of t":
early 1960s to co-ordinate the work of the 16 cially the aircraft was 'undergoing repair on the Tu-1 6 had been lostforvarious reasons, inclu:-
airfields in the High North. ln addition to these, mainland'. For almost a year, from 23rd May ing 72 Air Force (DA) aircraft and 34 Navy a -
temporary airfields with hard-packed earth run- 1958 until 16th April 1959, the Tu-16 drifted craft. ln the early years the share of fatal a^:
ways and ice runways were set up, although through the Arctic Ocean, accompanied by the non{atal accidents caused by hardware fa -

1 10 Tupolev Tu-16
!. Tu.'16 coded '04 Red' deploys its brake
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, _l
--: McDonnell Douglas F/A-18A Hornet. Trying
-- scare the Soviet aircraft off its intended The Tu-16 in its various versions formed the tion and delivery of the Tu-22M2 and Tu-22M3
backbone of the Long-Range Aviation for a got under way in Kazan', the Tu-16 remained in
:::rse, the fighters performed dangerous
-a.roeuvres, including head-on passes. This considerable time. From the late 1950s, when service with the overwhelming majority of
:::-and-mouse game ended in tragedy when lhef u-22long-range bomber entered service, Long-Range Aviation and Naval Air Arm regi-
-.', o of the 'attackers' collided directly above the several DA regiments at Baranovichi, Machul- ments. The numbers of the different versions
---16 and exploded; one pilot was killed, the ishchi, Zyabrovka, Ozyornoe and Nezhin and of the Tu-16 in service with the DA as of 1st
::-er managed to eject. The flying debris dam- naval air regiments at Saki, Ostrov and Kalin- January 1979 are given in the table below.
:;ed the Tu-16 but managed to limp back to ingrad began converting to the new type. About as many Tu-1 6 (of which 209 were
: ase thanks to the courage and skill of its crew. However, thefu-22 was not a completely suc- missile strike aircraft) remained in service with
in the course of its service career the Tu-16 cessful aircraft, accident-prone and compli- the Naval Air Arm .
,. as called upon to carry some unusual civilian cated to operate. Production of the Tu-22 was At the end of 1981 the Long-Range Aviation
::ssengers. ln 1957, when it was vital to sum- terminated at the end of the 1960s. The air reg- had 487 Tu-16 and the Naval Air Arm 474' One
iment at Vozdvizhensk took delivery of several hundred and fifty-six were in service with other
-3n the first secretaries of the regional and
: sirict Communist party commlttees for an new machines initially, but then passed them elements of the Soviet Armed Forces and the
:,:raordinary full party meeting to support on to other regiments and reverted to the defence industry. MAP documents also listed
'. (ita S Khrushchov against an 'anti-Commu- Tu-1 6. 106 examples as 'not current' by then (this
- si opposition group' within the Soviet gov- The service debut of the Tu-22 in the 1960s included both aircraft written off due to techni-
:-'rment, Gheorgiy K Zhukov used his power as hardly diminished the role of the Tu-16 in the cal condition and accident attrition). The
l:fence Mlnister to arrange for the necessary nation's defence. Firstly, there were far fewer remaining machines, apart from those
:arty bosses to be flown in on Tu-16 bombers. regiments equipped with the Tu-22 than with exported, do not appear in the statistics for
irrushchov was thereby enabled to convoke a the Tu-16; secondly, the Tu-16 was the more some reason.
: .num quickly and gain the necessary num- versatile machine with a significantly wider The scales began to tip in favour of the
range of applications; thirdly, at its subsonic f u-22M in the 'eighties after the Tu-1 6 had been
-:r of votes. ln this way the Tu-16 played a cru-
: al part in the power struggle among the cruising speed the Tu-22 had no advantages in taken out of service in large numbers. At the
::litical leaders of the USSR in the second half performance over the Tu-16; finally, the K-26 end of 1990 there were 173 Tu-16s in the Euro-
weapons system with the KSR-5 missile was at pean part of the USSR, of which 81 were in
-=n",ntO. Long-Range Aviation service and 92 in Naval
__ least equal, and in some aspects superior, to
Air Arm service. The DA Tu-16 served with the
lhe K-22 system.
During the 1970s more modern types of 251st Air Training Regiment (UAP - oochebnyy
bombers and missile carriers, the Tu-22M1, aviapolk) at Belaya Tserkov' (40 aircraft), the
f u-22M2 and later the Tu-22M3, began to enter 260th TBAP based at Stryy (23 aircraft) and the
service with the DA and the AVMF. ln 1972 the 2o0th TBAP at Bobruisk (1 B tankers). The Black
air regiment at Poltava was the first to get the Sea Fleet's 540ih MRAP based at Nikolayev-
fu-22M, followed by the unit at Sol'tsy, both Kul'bakino in the Ukraine had 20 machines,
regiments at Belaya Tserkov', the regiment at and there were 38 further examples, mainly
Shaikovka and so on. ln the Naval Air Arm the Tu-16K-10-26s, operating from airfields in the
regiments at Nikolayev, Sovetskaya Gavan', Crimea. ln the North Fleet in 1991 there were
Bykhov and the like were re-equipped. The reg- four examples in service with the 924th Air Reg-
iment at Priluki was re-equipped with this type iment at Olen'ya AB and 30 more with the regi-
in the 1980s. But even when full-scale produc- ment at Severomorsk-3 AB. There were also

Year Built Tu.l6Tu-l6ATu.162Tu.16NTu-l6RTu-16KSRTu.16YolkaTu.15PBukel

1 954 3 il
1 955 I 5 5 99 B 25

1 956 4 I t5 2 52 27 44

B 14 38 4 27
1 957 10 21

8 5 29 B
1 958 1

o.1 38 20 211 6B 104

'Cherry picker'trucks with powered telescopic
ladders were used lor maintenance of the tail Overall Total 496
unit. Yefim Gordon archive

TupolevTu-16 111
The end of the road. lgnominiously dumped, the severed flightdeck
sections at the Hussian Navy's Ostrov AB near Pskov testify that another
12 Tu-l6s have gone the way ol all metal. The second aircraft in the row The savagely hacked rear fuselage of another Tu.1 6 at Ostrov AB, with lhe
was c/n 72o3A2O and was equipped with individual protection ECM gear main gear bogies (probably belonging to the same machine) visible
(note the traces of the nose thimble radome); the seventh aircraft lrom beyond, The number on the remains serves to make sure all parts are
right was a Tu-16K-1 1-16. Yefim Gordon accounted for and nothing is stolen! Yefim Gordon

some 60 machines in service in the Far East with ln Russia the Tu-16 was officially retired from Mujahideen bases and concentrations wher^
the Pacific Fleet Air Arm. After 1991 almost all service in 1994, although there were examples apart from attacking insurgent positions, it car-
surviving Tu-16 were withdrawn from use, a of the Tu-1 6K-10 family built in 1963 which had ried out bombing raids in the vicinity of the
handful remaining with the NavalAirArm, GK Nll not reached the end of their 35 year service life. towns of Herat and Kandahar which were con-
WS and Lll. From the close of 1995 the Tu-16 By this tlme the Tupolev OKB had ceased to trolled by the rebels.
virtually ceased to operate in the Ukraine, work on the Tu-16. The bomber versions were used on th:
although 49 examples were stored at air bases For a long time the two 'Cyclone' weather largest scale - the Tu- 1 64, Tu-1 6KSR-2-5 anc
and 1 9 others continued in serve as trainers with research aircraft stood unused. At Zhukovskiy Tu-16KSR-2-5-1 1 bomber/missile strike ai'
the 540th Air Regiment. By this time not a single only a single Tu-161L was kept in flying condi- craft, as well as Tu-16R reconnaissance aircra:
active Tu-16 remained in Belarus'. tion. Apparently this was the last f lying example and the Tu-16P ECM version. Other varianis
The last Long-Range Aviation regiment to fly of the Tu- l6 on Russian soil. rarely saw action in Afghanistan. A typica
the Tu-16 was the lndependent Long-Range bomb load consisted of 12 FAB-500 bombs
Reconnaissance Air Regiment based at sometimes, in special circumstances, larger c'
the regiment had re-
Spassk-Dal'niy. After The Tu-16 in Action smaller calibre bombs (250-kg, 1,000-kg
equipped with the fu-22M, the remaining 3,000-kg, 5,000-kg and even 9,000-kg bombs
reconnaissance and ECM versions were ferried ln addition to the many exercises, reconnais- of the M-54 or M-46 series) were used. C-
to Belaya Tserkov' AB for mothballing. Sadly, sance flights and other special duties on behalf occasion this was because the bombs wer:
no money could be sourced for even placing of the Soviet Armed Forces, the Tu-1 6 also took nearing the end of their storage life and had ::
the aircraft in storage; the remaining Tu-16s in part in actual combat in other countries. be disposed of.
Russia were scrapped. ln August 1968 the Tu-16P was employed Aparl from the Tu-16, other Long-Range A,, -
At the Chagan storage depot in the Semi- during the Soviet invasion of Czechoslovakia, ation units armed with the f u-22R andTu-221'' :
palatinsk Region, some 100 examples of vari- providing ECM cover during the deploymeni of took part in operations over Afghanistan. Tl-:
ous versions of the Tu-16 stood rusting away tactical aviation and military air transport for- 'veteran'Tu-1 6 was used in this conflict primar .
for a long time. After their 'privatisation' by mations on the day that Warsaw Pact Jorces because of its ability to carry a 9,000-kg bon::
Kazakhstan, they soon became non-airworthy. intervened. The only real war in which SovietAir The FAB-9000 could give the terrain a 'workir:
A similar fate befell the Ukrainian machines Force Tu-16s took part was the Afghan War. over', levelling hills and high ground and pr:-
after the disiniegration of the USSR. The type was used in bombing raids against 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,' :'
The aircraft flew from Soviet territory in srra
groups: a f light of three or four or a squadron :
eight to ten machines. Only experienced a ''
crews trained in formation flying were chos:-
-3 and the overall standard for aircraft comma-
- ders and navigators had to be no lower tia-
t- - Pilot 2nd Class.

A Tu-l6 drops a stick of bombs; the aircraft
I appears to be equipped with the SRS.I SIGINT
G system (note the small blister ahead of the
L bomb bay). Yefim Gordon archive

112 Tupolev Tu-16

Tu-16 Operators Abroad ln 1959 the decision was taken to begin
=:nbing operations over Afghan territory
r:': carried out by almost all air regiments licence production on China, and in the same
:::'aiing the Tu- 1 6 in the European part of the year a large technical team left the USSR for
China to assist in setting up series production.
- :S3. The most active was the Belaya Tserkov'
:_: rent. The missions were flown from Central It remained in China until the autumn of 1960.
-..:r airfields, particularly from Maryy in Turk- Xian H-6 Strategic Bomber The Chinese allocated two factories in

-:^ a and Karshi in Uzbekistan. From here the ln early 1956 a Sino-Soviet agreement was Harbin and Xian (sometimes spelled Xi'an) for
:-:;,s made training flights over the desert and reached for the licence production, with Soviet Tu-16 production. ln May 1959 the assembly of
--:::ised bombing with the aid of LORAN. assistance, of the lL-28 and Tu-16 bombers in a Tu-16 from the parts supplied from Kazan'
l:re of the biggest raids on the Mujahideen the People's Republic of China (PRC). The began in Harbin (the Harbin factory received
:a:e took place on 22nd April 1984. Twenty- licence agreement for manufacture of the assistance in the form of 200 qualified workers
":-- Tu-16KSR-2-5, each carrying either 40 or Tu-16 was signed in September 1957. Under seconded from the aircraft factory at Shenyang
HE bombs, took part in the raid. the terms of this, China received two produc- which was producing MiG fighters under
-: =AB-250
--: target was located in a mountain valley tion Tu-16 bombers and a further aircraft in the
-::r Kandahar. Two squadrons from the regi- form of a completely knocked-down (CKD) kit,
'10794 Blue', a standard People's Liberation
-:.ri at Bobruisk and one squadron from the essential for mastering the assembly of the first Army Air Force nuclear-capable H-6A. Like the
-=l ment at Belaya Tsekov' were involved; ihe examples, from plant No22 in Kazan'together genuine Tu-16A, it has a'nuclear'colour scheme
. -::aft flew in echelon formation, one squad- with the necessary technical documentation. with white undersurlaces, China Aircraft
:- oehind the other. The first eight machines .
of the
=-e led by Colonel Pachin, Commander
i-.lin GvTBAP.
.i first it was planned to deliver the bombs ',,ffiWffiTr,*;x,:*******r,- i

-:'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 machines
r: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 visible
against the snowy background.
Postattack reconnaissance was made with
:he assistance of the Tu-168; photographs
showed clearly that the air group had carried
cut their mission with distinction.

The Tu-l5 was built in China as the H-6. Here,

lhree substantially complete H-6s share the final
assembly shop at Xian with two Y7H (licence-
built Antonov An-26) transports' China Aircraft

Tupolev Tu-16 1 13
Above left: A pair of H-6As ('10897 Blue'and
d$*i'rin'tr '10990 Blue') lly in echelon starboard tormation
high above mainland China. The first two digits
of ihe serial may be a code denoting one of
China's eight detence districts, the fourth digit is
:-*J1 -H#''*.o**.,
Fl+#d!"{6j#Jti;ikrt{r; r ' r a unit code, while the third and fifth digits make
s +i$iiwffi!r@'{#,!#*i L t up the individual number ol the aircraft in the
i,tffi unit; thus, '10897 BIue' and '10990 Blue' are the
4;jffidEF'dt I 87th and 90lh aircraft in their Heavy Bomber
*"ffirtr Division. Note the low-visibility presentation ol
ihe 'stars and bars' national insignia, China Aircra:

trt Above right: More H-6As, including'50674 Blue

outline'and '50675 Blue outline', at a PLAAF
A base; the low-visibility serials are noteworthy.
The entrance hatches are kept open to save time
lfiw in the event of a 'hot scramble'. China Aircraft

An impressive line-up of at least 17 PLAAF

H-6As parked at a Chinese airbase, with a Y7H
in between. China Atrcraft

Two H-6As taxi out tor a sortie. China Aircraft


Photographs on the opposite page:

i: r - l"4F"l'f
f *", i;nr"11,
_dtr ',fu.#
An H-6D at the factory airfield in Xian, with a Y7

t"E * * airliner (licence-built An-248) visible beyond.

iit r" {*,,
The two C-601 Silkworm ASMS are clearly visible

under the wings. Note how much longer the

# missile pylons are than those of the Soviet

missile-toting versions, China Aircraft

An operational camouflaged H-6D with two

C-601 missiles. The missile pylons are nof
bifurcated; quite simply, their leading edges are
painted green while the rest is left unpainted,
creating this eerie impression. China Aircraft

An air-to-air view of an H-oD serialled'61225

Blue outline', showing the characteristic triple
tail surfaces of the C-601 missiles. lnterestingly.
this one spons a'nuclear'colour scheme more
typical of the H-6A. China Aircraft

Bottom left: This factory-lresh H-6D displays an

unusual dark green colour scheme intended to
make the aircraft less conspicuous over the sea.
Note the non-standard aerial ahead of the
llightdeck windscreen. China Aircraft

Bottom right: Another view ol the H-6D, showing

to advantage the much-enlarged llat-bottomed
radome. Jane's All the World's Aircraft

114 Tupolev Tu-16

f*** lq*s


Tupolev Tu-1 6
licence). The first Chinese Tu-16 assembled
from Soviet-supplied parts made its maiden
flight on 27th September 1959 and was handed
over 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 engineering
staff and 1,697 other workers were transferred
from Shenyang. ln 1961 the Chinese leaders
decided to concentrate all work on the licence-
built Tu-16 at the Xian factory. The Chinese
have 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 for
the Chinese atomic bomb started at Xian. The
bomb bay and bomb release system were mod-
ified, a thermal stabilisation system for nuclear
weapons fitted in the bomb bay, and the neces-
sary monitoring and recording equipment for
nuclear testing installed. To all intents and pur-
poses this aircraft was the counterpart of the
Soviet Tu-16A. On 14th May 1966 this aircraft
*,.il; carried out the successful testing of the third
s. .,"11 lriJ Chinese A-bomb over a range in western China.
Work on preparing the jigs for the series pro
-.. erryry; .**fr tu{l t duction 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 bomber
completely built in China (with Chinese'Wopen-
8' engines - licence-built versions of the Soviei
RD-3M-500 with a take-off thrust of 9,520k91
made iis first flight. The crew were commandec
by 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 causec
by the spread of the Great Chinese Cultura
Revolution. ln all, up to 1987, the London lnstr-
tute for Strategic Studies estimates that some-
thing like 120 H-6 bombers in various versions
were built in China. The standard version was
an analogue of the Soviet Tu-1 64 and intendec
to carry conventional and nuclear bombs.

ln 1970 work began on designing a new gener-
ation integrated navigational and bomb-aiming
system for the H-6 with a high degree oi
automation. The system comprised an onboarc
computer, automatic plotter, Doppler naviga
tional radar, a more developed autopilot and a
new 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

1 16 Tupolev Tu-16
A Chinese-built llatbed lorry with a crane tows a whole train of trailers
loaded with general-purpose bombs due to be loaded in a squadron
of 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, probably
associated 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 additional

radomes. 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 low

pass; the missiles are painted red, suggesting they are dummies or
inert practice rounds' Curiously, the aircraft appears to lack delensive
armament, 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.'50777 liiln'iltiii',;li;
Blue' 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

lltnolev lu-lo lll

'43595 Blue', an HY-6 refuelling tanker. sho r ! :
the 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 breaks

lormation with HY-6'43595 Blue'after a simu.::r:
in-flight refuelling during an airshow. Chr= : ':'
*qs. ho'

]r 'rlii,r,, 4

r'"" 1,,,';'1
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:-'i
radar mounted in front of the navigator's stat :i
" whose glazing is reduced to a narrow ring of
transparencies, China Aircraft

A retouched photo showing an HY-6 refuellin-c

two Shenyang J-8Ds at once, China Aircraft

This modilied H-6 serialled '086 Blue'was the

Chinese countelpart of the Tu-16LL testbeds.
leaturing a very similar development engine
installation in a hydraulically retractable pod i:
the bomb bay. Note the sprinkler grid installec
ahead ot the engine for icing tests, China A,r:':'

This two-point tanker is believed to be

designated H-6DU. The glazed nose and the
deep chin radome reveal its origins lrom the
H-6D missile strike aircraft. China Aircraft

H-6E Bomber
, The H-6E is a modernised version of the H-:-
, r,+-, ''
'*''l with upgraded onboard equipment, up-grac::
. lr,
,"j.:i '
engines and a new ECM system. Externarl.
differs from the H-6A in lacking the latter's nc.=

ar '\g
gun position and in its grey/sky-blue fir
which makes it less visible from below.

a gi4. H-6H Anti-Shipping Missile Carrier
Developed from the H-6D, the H-6H differs
its predecessor in possessing a dielect' :
teardrop fairing aft of the bomb bay. All defe'
sive armament has been removed. lt seer:-.
lay mines and drop smoke markers. Most Chi- The YJ-6L ASM (export designation C-601 , likely that the aircraft is provided with ne,',
nese bombers were produced in this version. given the NATO codename Sl/kworm) was equipment, in particular a modernised raca-
developed in the PRC from the Soviet P-15 anti- target detection and guidance system, and :
Reconnaissance and ECM Versions shipping missile supplied to China at the end of new ECM set, the antenna for which is pos-
As in the USSR, recce and ECM versions were the 1950s. The missile had a range of 120km tioned in the ventral blisterfairing. lt seems als:
developed from the basic H-6. Their precise and a speed of Mach 0.8. likely that its main armament is the new YJ-62
designations are still unknown, but they differ The first flight of the experimental H-6D took ASM with a 150-km range developed from th:
externally Jrom the bomber version in having place on 29th August 1981 , with the first launch YJ-6, using a global positioning system or Tt.
underwing pylon-mounted pods (similar to of a YJ-61 following on 6th December. The test guidance. The H-6H and the H-6D are the
those on the Soviet Tu-1 6R) program for the aircraft and the ASM complex PLANAF's standard strike aircraft.
as a whole concluded at the end of 1983. ln
H-6D Anti-Shipping Missile Carrier December 1985 the new anti-shipping complex H-6H (Modernised Version)
ln 1975 work began on an anti-shipping version entered service with the People's Liberation A video showing tests of a new ASM carrie:
of the H-6A armed with two underwing anti- Army Naval Air Force (PLANAF). based on the H-6H was made public at Airshov'
shipping missiles. The carrier, given the desig- ln May 1985 the H-6D with its C-601 missiles China-2002 held at Zhuhai-Sanzao airport. This
nation H-6D (or H-6 lV), was equipped with a was exhibited at the Paris Air Show. development was characterised by four under-
missile guidance system, an automated Recently, the YJ-61 (C-601 ) has been replaced wing pylons (two under each wing) with air-to-
onboard navigational system and a new sur- by the more modern YJ 61 (C-61 1) which has a surface or anti-shipping missiles. lt seems likely
veillance radar (type 245) in a much-enlarged range of 200km. that the new aircraft will be armed with the new
flat-bottomed radome linked to the missile ASM in the YJ-B series similar to the US
guidance system. The wings were strength- B-6D (Export Version of the H-6D) AGIV-84E SLAM (Stand-off Land Attack Missile)
ened to carry the missiles which were sus- A version of the H-6D for export was designated or AGM-142 Popeye missiles. lt is also Iikely to
pended on pylons like those on the Tu-16R. B-6D (B for bomber). Four were supplied to lraq. have all-weather day/ni ght capability.

118 TupolevTu-16

'ffiti';in,ffif+ dlit'

TupolevTu-16 119
;",iffrf* *

ilii I n(rq i.h ri,r€!

HY-6 (H-6U, HU-G) Tanker Testbeds Based on the H-6

This two-point hose-and-drogue IFR tanker Some H-6 bombers have been refitted as test-
was produced to extend the operation radius of beds for aero engines and various other sys-
The second country to receive Tu-1 6 aircraft
the Shenyang J-8D interceptor. lt has some- tems. One of these (serialled '086 Blue', later
from the USSR was lndonesia. ln the summer
times been referred to in the press as the H-6U '86 Blue') was used to test a jet engine sus-
of 196.1 25 Tu-16KS missile strike aircraft (othe:
or HU-6. Apart from the podded hose drum pended beneath the fuselage, as on the Soviet
sources give 20 examples) were transferred tc
units (similar to the Flight Refuelling Mk32 Tu-1611. Unlike the latter type, the Chinese
HDUs Jitted to the Vickers VCl0 C.1K), the HY- testbed appeared to have an icing testfunction,
the lndonesian Air Force (AURI Angkatar,
Udara Republik Indonesia) where they formec
6 can be identified by the redesigned nose sec- with what looked like a water sprinkler grid
the 41st and 42nd Squadrons based outside
tion with a conventionally mounted weather/ mounted a short way ahead of the develop-
Djakarta. During the conflict between lndone-
navigation radar ahead of the navigator's sta- ment engine's air intake.
sia and Malaysia these aircraft were used as a
tion which has a greatly reduced glazing area
display of lndonesian military might, making
(the absence of the chin radome lends the H-61 Testbed
incursions into Malaysian airspace near Singa-
tanker a certain similarlty to the Soviet Tu-161L Another propulsion testbed known as the H-61
pore, although they were not used opera-
engine testbeds). has been fitted with four Rolls-Royce Spey non-
tionally. After the break between lndonesia anc
The first example was shown during the mil- afterburning turbofans. Two of these replace
the USSR the Tu-16KSs sat parked for soms
itary parade in Beijing on 1st October 1999. the normal engines and a further two are
time, grounded for lack of spares. Whe:
Some sources date the first flight to 1990, and installed in pylon-mounted nacelles at about
lndonesia acquired new Western air technol-
the aircraft was first detected by an American half-span.
ogy, they were scrapped. One example sur-
surveillance satellite in 1996. lt is currently esti-
vives as a museum exhibit.
mated that ten examples of the HY-6 are based
ln the 1970s and 1980s a few Chinese H-6s
on Laiyan AB in Guangzhou province. Their pri-
either replaced or augmented the Tu-16 aircraft
mary purpose seems to be the refuelling of
supplied by the USSR to Egypt and lraq.
J-BD interceptors over the South China Sea.
Like the Tu-16, the H-6 bomber has been
used in the PRC in various research and devel-
H-6DU Tanker
opment work aimed at improving and develop- In 1963 some 20 Tu-16KSs were supplied to th:
Some H-6D naval ASM carriers were converted
ing various forms of aviation technology. The Egyptian Air Force (al Quwwat aLJawwiya t -
into two-point hose-and-drogue tankers (provi-
Chinese equivalent of the Soviet Lll has made Misriya) where they formed two squadrons
sionally though to be designated H-6DU). They
use of several of these testbeds. The aircrews were trained in the USSR an:
can be distinguished from the PLAAF's stan-
The H-6A and H-6D differ slightly from the Soviet specialists took part in their servic.
dard HY-6 tanker by the forward fuselage
Soviet Tu-16, as the comparative data below induction in Egypt. ln June 1967, in the firs'
retaining a fully glazed navigator's station and
shows: hours of the Six-Day War, they were destroye:
deep chin radome.
by lsraeli aircraft on their airfields before the.
H-6 Reconnaissance Version H.6D could take part in military operations.
At least one H-6 was converted into an ELINT After the war, the USSR supplied the Egyc.
Length of aircraft fuselage 34.8m 34.8m tians with about 20 further Tu-16KSR-2As ar:
version with pylon-mounted underwing pods
similar to the SRS-3 pods of the Soviet Tu-16R
runway 0.36m 0 36m
Height of aircraft from 1 1
Tu- 1 6KSR-2-1 1 s, a stock of KSR-2 ASMs, se . .
W ng span 34.1 9m 34,1 9m eral Tu-16R reconnaissance aircraft with SRS--
and a hemispherical dielectric blister ahead of
Wrng Area 161.65m' 67,55m' and SRS-3 SIGINT kits and Tu-165PS ECM a '-
the bomb bay. The exact designation is still 1

unknown at present. Weight of aircraft empty 37.729k9 38,530k9 craft. Atotal of 25Tu-16swas delivered. Awh =
lVax take-off weight 72,000k9 72,000k9 later, on 26th January 1966, the Soviet Coun:
H-6 Target Drone Carrier Version lVax speed with two C-601 SAMs 786km/h of Ministers authorised the delivery of s '
This is an H-6 bomber speclally modified to Tu-16T torpedo-bombers to Egypt. ln Septer-.
Servrce ceiling 12,000m
launch high-speed, high-altitude target drones. ber 1967 aircrews of the Black Sea Fleet Nar:
Maximum range 4,300km
The exact designation is likewise unknown. Air Arm ferried these machines to Cairo-We:'

120 Tupolev Tu-16

Opposit page: A poor-quality but interesting
picture of the highly modified H'61, showing the
redesigned circular intakes in the wing roots
associated with the installation of RR Spey
turbofans and the podded installation of the
outer Speys. China Aircraft

M 1618, one ol 25 Tu-16KS missile carriers
delivered to the lndonesian Air Force, with a lull
complement of missiles and a sister ship visible
beyond. The ZiS-150 lorry in the background
was likewise Soviet-supplied. Yefim Gordon archive

Another lndonesian Air Force Tu-16KS; the last

four digits of the c/n (6203404) are visible on
the lail, Yelim Gordon archive

An Egyptian Air Force Tu-16KSB'2 serialled

4403; the serial is written in Arabic numerals on
the rear fuselage and the last two digits are
repeated in Roman numerals on the nose.
/el m Gordon archive

i r,rii"i1l "'ri'lii1i
.ia;rr 'i


sffi .i

Tupolev Tu-16 121

-t- " S-k,


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 above
ire 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 ; note

the antenna array of the Ritsa radar homing
system on the nose. Egyptian Badgers wore a
three-tone camoullage. Yetim Gordon archiveTop:
Another quasi-Egyptian Tu.16R (4376) - this
time a more comprehensively equipped aircraft
leaturing the SRS-I and SRS.4 SIGINT packs -
is inspected by a US Navy F-4 from a carrier
deployed to the Mediterranean.
tane's Allthe World's Aircraft

Another Egyptian Tu-16KSR-2 serialled 4404;

this one sports only the Arabic serial which is
carried on the nose rather than on the rear
fuselage as is customary. Yefim Gordon archive

This allegedly Egyptian Tu-16R serialled 4378

and equipped only with the SRS.I SIGINT Pack
is in fact an impostor - a Soviet Navy aircraft on
temporary deployment in Egypt. The EAF
roundels and fin llash were applied in order to
avoid political complications but, unlike the EAF,
the Soviet Navy did not bother repainting the
aircraft. Jane's Allthe World's Aircraft

Tupolev Tu-16 123



,, *",,.,,,.++

airfield where Egyptian crews were trained had provided. ln an endeavour to maintain their
under the supervision of Soviet instructors. machines in operational condition, the Egyp-
Hosni Mubarak, the future president of Egypt, tians turned to China. ln April 1976 an agree- ln the 1970s, the lraqi Air Force (al Quwwat al-
was taken for a flight in one of them. These air- ment was signed between the two countries by Jawwiya al-lraqiya) acquired eight Tu-1 6KSR-2-
craft equipped two squadrons which took an which the PRC furnished Egypt with spares for 11s and some examples of the Tu-22 whicr-
active part in operations during the Yom Kippur their H-6s. The Western press claimed that were used to form two bomber squadrons
War of October 1973. ln the course of this 'sec- China acquired several examples of the latest These aircraft were used during the lran-lrac
ond round' of hostilities Egyptian Tu-'1 6 ASM Soviet military technology in exchange, includ- war of 1980-BB to bomb lranian positions, as
carriers launched some 25 missiles against ing a Mikoyan MiG-238N ground attack aircraft. well as military and civilian targets in lran. Ir
lsraeli targets on the Sinai Peninsula, destroy- At the beginning of 1990 the Egyptian Air particular, Tu-16KSR-2-1 1 aircraft bombec
ing two radar sites and a field supply depot. The Force operated 16 examples of the Tu-16 Teheran airport. The lraqi Tu-16 ASM carriers
Tu-16R was also used for recce missions which formed a bomber brigade based in the also carried out several missile launches
Mindful of the experience gained from the Six- south of the country. against lranian objectives.
Day War, the Egyptian Tu-16 aircraft were Subsequently, lraq purchased four H-6D fror-
based on airfields south of Sinai beyond the the PRC with a large number of C-601 ASMs
reach of the lsraeli Defence Force/Air Force. Above: Quasi-Egyptian Tu-16R Badger-F'4380' After the disintegration of the USSR, China suc'
According to the Egyptians, their Tu-16 aircraft shows otf the SRS-3 SIGINT pods and the plied lraq wlth spares for its Tu-16 and H-6 flee:
suffered no losses - although the Israelis camera port in the forward fuselage. At the outbreak of the Gulf War in 1991 virlu'
Jane's All the World's Atrcraft ally all lraqi Tu-16s had come to the end of the -
claimed one destroyed
After the break between Egypt and the USSR lraqi Air Force Tu-16 in flight. service lives and were grounded. Some we:=
Below: An
in the spring of 1976, the Soviets cut off the sup- Examples delivered to the lraq wore this damaged in Allied air strikes and son'=
ply of spares for all the military equipment they sand/green camouflage. Yefim Gordon archive destroyed on the ground.

124 Tupolev Tu-16


Production List

-.-l6produciionispresentedinconstructionnumberorderforeachfac. Foreachaircraft,theversionsaremarked'inorderofappearance'
rrr. with all identities worn consecutively by each aircraft. The four-digit to show how this or that aircraft was converted in the course of its
-urrbers given after a slash with the c/ns of some Kazan'-built aircraft serviceliJe.,Deceased'(thatis,crashed)examplesaremarkedwitht
*e,e carrild on the tail below the c/n; the first digit is again the year of (RlPcrosses)followedbythedateandlocationoftheaccident;thelet-
of the iers in parentheses following this mean 'fatal accident' (f) or
-anufacture, followed by what is probably the sequence number
a-::aft built as a missile carrier. accident'(nf),

|(aan' Aircraft Factory No 22


Conslruction Velsion Iactical codel Manufaclure Notes

:n:Jation Version Tactical codel Manufacture Notes
Reghkalion date'
ucEi Registratlon date'

?.8.1954 t 15'21955 (nf) destroyed bY lre

?-12-1953 203rdTBAP,Baranovichi; 4200804 Tu'16A
?? TBAP, Kiev-BorisPol' | 4200805 TUIOA
l' l: !. !Yli'i: lf]
2601h TBAP, Str)ry
?-12.'1953 ??TBAP:
Tul6A ?? TBAP, Bagerovo AB
i qzoosot Tu-16A ?.91954

?-1I954 : 4200902 Tul6A ?'9-1954

Tul6 ' ?? TBAP;
?? TBAP, Bagerovo AB . +zOosOS Tul6A ?'9-1954
TutG ?-11954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichl
I 42oo9o4 Tul6A ?.9-1954

| 4200905 Tu-16A
llllli il:191ldllo'r'illilllll'

{t::2:') Tu-'16 no code ?-2-1954
203rd TBAP, Baranovichi
'| +ZOtOOt Tu-16KS
4201002 Tu-16A ? ?-11t954 Produciion standard lor 1955; Lll
{':::2 Tu.16 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB
'| 6-41954 Balbasovo (l) , tu'tOLt- 02 Blue

{t!4.3 ?-2-1954 402ndTBAP,BalbasovoAB; : qzotOOs Tu-16A ?-9-1954

GK NII WS : 4201004 TUIOA ?-9t954

r:!r:2]l 24-31954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi; : Tu-16Kt116 Preserved Russlan AF l\,4useum,

lvlonino. now as '53 Red'
402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB : tu'tOf'2o 53 Blue

24:3:]e54 201dTBAP]Blrl:li:fl : 42oioo5 Tul6A ?-10-1954

li lu :

{r:-il1 tu-tb ?-3.1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi , +ZOttOt Tul6KS ?-10-1954

{c:t2 ?.3-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi; | 4201102 Tu'16KS ?-1 0-1954

GK NII WS : 4201103 Tut6A ?1 1-1954

?-4-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi; : qZOlOq Tu'16A ?t 1l 954

Tu-16 36 Black
402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB: : +ZOllOS Tut6A 23 Red ?-10-1954

?? TBAP, Bagerovo ABI

,4201106 TuloKS ?.10.1954

Tupolev OKB/Kazan' btanch : 4201107 Tu-16A ?.10.1954

--lr:rl& Tu-16 ?-4-1954 203rd TBAP, Baranovichi I +ZOttOg Tu-16A ?-1 1-1954

no code ?-4-1954
,4201109 Tu-16A ?-1 1.1954 t 15-21955 Tartu (f)

-:r:r!5 Tu-16
: 4201110 Tut6A (ulTll:oll 251$ TBAP
l't:'up' :..... 11Y:'!: I'I:llln
'i lull : qZOtzol T!164 ?-1 1 t954
72 Red ?-51954 ?? TBAP, Engels-2 AB
Tul6 To plant No 1 as CKD kit : 42U2A2 TUIOA 21 11954

{,:.103 Tu-16 ?-51954 , cZOlZOg Tu-16A n^

?-12 1954
?-51 954 Ll l, de'icing system testbed : qZOtZOq Tut6A
Tu-16 44 Red
?"5t954 : 4201205 Tu'16A ?-12'1954
: 4201206 Tu'16A ?-12-1954

]i:lu^t. : qZOlZOt Tul6A ?-12-1954

jr:i401 77 Red ?-6-1954

, 4201208 Tu-16A; [I-16? '14
Red? ?-12-1954 [,4-16 may be c/n 8204208?
Tut6T 3-8-'954 p'ototype. Nll AV[,4F, Feodosiya : 42012A9 Tu-16A ?,12.1954

,-:'i502 ?-6-1954 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB . lZOtZtO Tu-16A ?-12.1954

71 Red {Ukraine AF) ?-6-1954
Tul6A 251stTBAP , qZOtSO1 Tul6A ?-12-1954

| 4201302 Tu'16A ?-12 1954

: qZOtSOg Tut6A ?-12t954

tr-]1504 Tul6A 1-7-1954 Tupolev OKBi
?? TBAP, Bagerovo AB;
, 5201304 Tu-16A ?-12 1954

:5201305 ?-2-195s
::'11505 To plant No 1 as CKD kit,
18800!l i 5201306 ?'21955
::::'l ': 5201307

?-61954 5201308 Tu-16 65 Bed ?-2-1955

-l,su I Tut6A 72 '17 Red
!::s602 Tu-16A ? ?-7-1954 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB :

29 Blue (Ukralne AF) 25lStTBAP i 5201oo9 Tu-16,Tu-16[.4 ?-2-1955

?-61954 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB , 5201310 Tu-16, Tut6[/

Tul6A ?-7-1954 ?? TBAP, Kiev-Borispol' :'.'.',.'.'',.'. "'1Y11
?t-1e5: c:nvel:dtlTtl:16KS? . szotqot ?.2.1955
'i llA , 5201402

:5201403 ?-2-1955
13$701 Tu-16A ?-7.1954
63 Red ?.2-1955
!2&702 Tu-16A ?-7-1954 ?? TBAP, Kiev-BorisPol'
', SZO1qO+
?-8-1954 5201405
:2,10703 Tut6A ?

Tul6K-26 40 Red (Ukaine AF)

: 5201406 70 Bed ?.2.1955
:. ?-2.1955
12!0704 Tu-16A ?-8-1954 402nd TBAP, Balbasovo AB 5201407

tY:luo. ?+1es4 : SZO1qOe Tul6,Tu'l6KSR'2'5 17 ?.2.1955

'*l!u : 5201409 ?-2-1955

r200801 TUtOA ?-8-1954 : 5201410 07 Black ?-3-1955

r200802 Tul6A ?-8-1954

1200803 Tul6A ?-8-1954

TupolevTu-16 125
Consfruction Yersion factical codel Manufactwe Notes Conskuctlon Yersion Tacticalcodel Manulactwe Notes
numbet Registrction date' nunbet Regisl/ation date

5201501 ?-3.1955 5202301 Tul6A ?.7-1955 t 10-1-195i (r?

5201502 ?-3-1955 5202302 Tul6A ?-7-1S55

5201503 Tul6A ?-3-1955 5202303 Tul6A ?-7-1955

u:o 5202304 Tu-l6A ?-8.1955

:1ol 1rl*u 5202305 Tu-16A ?.7.1955

5201505 ?.3.1955 5202306 Tu"16A ?-7-1955

5201506 ?-3.1955 5202307 Tu-16A ?-9-1955

5201507 ?-3-195s 5202308 Tul6A ?.8-1955

5201508 ?-3-1955 5202309 Tut6A ?.9-1955

urll ul: ,? ui:

'!lllu Il11n:l0

5201601 ?-3-1955 52A2402 Tu-16A ?-9.1955

5201602 ?"3-1955 i 30'5-1957 (0 5202403 Tul6A ?-9-1955

5201603 21,43 Red ?-31955 Code'43Bed'is unconlirmed 5202404 Tul6A ?-9-195s

5201604 Tu-l6KSR-2? 25 Blue ?-3-1955 5202405 Tu-164 ?.91955

5201605 ?-3-1955 1841hTBAP,Priluki. 52024A0 Tul6A ?.9.1955
17-8-1957 (0 5202407 Tul6A ?-9-1955

5201606 ?-4t955 5202408 Tu-16A ?,9-1955

5201607 Tut6A ?-3-1955 order 684/1' 5202409 Tu-16A ?.9.1955

ll9'1lo 't l9o lnl?
?{-1e55 5202501 Tu.16A wth',EC[.4 tail' 28 Red ?-9'1955 SPS-I00 & SPS-s relit
:1!lulo Tu.16K-11-16

5201701 ?-4-1955 5202502 Tul6A ?.9-1955

5201702 ?-4-1955 5202503 TUJ6A ?-9-1955

5201703 ?-4-1955 52Q25A4 Tul6A ?-9-195s

52017Q4 ?-4t955 5202505 Tu-16A ?,9-1955

5201705 ?.4-1955 5202506 Tu-l6A ?-9.1955

?-4-1955 t\,1-16 15 Fed GK Nll WS/Akhtoobif sk
5201707 ?.4t955 52A2507 Tu-16A ?-9-1955

5201708 ?-4.1955 5202508 Tu.16A ?-9t955

5201709 ?-4-1955 5202509 Tul6A ?.9.1955

:i9r1lo :202:l: li:164

lll .

5201801 ?-4-1955 5202601 Tu-16A ?.9.1955

5201802 ?-4-1955 5202602 Tu-16A ?-9-1955

5201803 ?-4,1955 Tu-16P Buket 94 Red

5201804 Tu-16A ?-4t955 5202603 Tu-16A ?-9-1955

5201805 ?.5-1955 5202604 Tu.16A ?.9t955

5201806 ?-5-1955 5202605 Tu-16A 11 Red ?.91955
5201807 ?-5-1955 5202606 Tul6A ?-9-1955

5201808 ?-5-1955 52Q2607 Tul6A ?-9-19s5

5201809 ?-5t955 5202608 Tu-16A ?-9-1955

?-5 5202609 Tu-16A ?.9-1955
::ol:l: les: 5202610 Tu-l6A ?-9-1955

5201901 ?-5-1955 5202611 Tu-16A ?-9t955

5201902 ?.5.1955 i23-12-1958(0? 5202612 Tu.16A ?-9t955
5201903 ?-5-1955 5202613 TUIOA ?.9-1955

5201904 Tu-l64 19 Fed ?-5-1955 52Q2614 Tut6A 23 ?-9-1955

5201905 ?-5.1955 Tul6KSR-2A

5201906 ?-5.1955 5202615 Tul6A ?-10.1955

5201907 Tul6 ?-5-1955 5202616 Tu-16KS ?.10-1955

Tul6P Buket 52A267 TU-16KS ?.10-1955

5201908 13 Red? ?-5t955 5212il8 Tu-16KS ?-10-1955

5201909 ?.5-1955 5202619 Tu.16KS ?-10-1955

l9illl olo'"9'il'l:19:l::T?l
lf9:u?l 'f l9l 1 19 lntf
5202001 ?-6-1gss 5202701 Tul6A ?-10-1955

5202002 ?-6-1955 5202702 Tu-16A ?-10-1955

5202003 ?-6t955 5202703 Tu-16A ?-10-1955 lS4thTBAP,Priluk.

52A2QQ4 ?.6-1955 t 1r4-1956 (0

5202005 ?-6-1955 52A2704 Tu-16A ?-10-1955

5202006 ?-6-1955 5202705 Tu-16A ?-10,1955

5202007 ?-6-1955 5202706 Tul6A ?,10-1955

5202008 Tu.16A ?.6-1955 5202707 Tul6A ?.10-1955

Tul 6K-1 1-16 5202708 Tul6A ?-10-1955

5202009 TuJ6 52 Fed ?-6t955 52A2709 Tu-16A ?t0t955

Tul6Kl 1"1 6 52a2710 Tu-16A ?.10.1955

5202010 Tul6A ?.6.1955 5202711 Tu-16A ?-10-1955

Tu-16KSR-2? 66 Red 5202712 Tu-16A ?-10-1955

5202713 Tut6A ?-11-1955
l::l9KSR:':1 5202714 Tul6A ?.1 1-1955

5202101 Tul6A ?.6-1955 5202715 Tul6A ?-1 1-1955

5202102 Tul6A ?.6-1955 5202716 Tu-16KS ?-10t 955

5202103 Tul6A ?.6-1955 52A2717 Tu-16KS ?-1 1 1955

5202104 Tul6A ?-6-1955 5202718 Tu.16A ?.11-1955

5202105 Tu-16A ?-6t955 5202719 Tul6A ?-1 1-'1955

5202106 ?-6-1955 TY:]6A

Tul6A ?-7-1955
::0272: I ll lnll
5202108 Tul6A ?-7-1955 5202801 Tu-16A ?-1 1-1955

5202109 Tul6A ?-71955 52A2802 Tu-16A ?-11t955

tr 5202803 1t955
lio'lll Tu-16A ?-1
Ii luo ln?l 5202804 Tu-16A ?-11-1955

5202201 Tu.16A ?-7-1955 5202805 Tu.16A ?-11-1955

52022A2 Tu-16A ?-7.1955 5202806 Tul6A ?-1 1-1955

5202203 Tul6A ?.7-1955 5202807 TUIOA ?-1 1-1955

5202204 Tul6A ?-7-1955 5202808 Tu-16A ?-1 1-1955 lSsthTBAP, Poltava.

5202205 Tu-164 ?-7t955 t 26-7'1e56 {0

5202206 Tu-16A ?.7-1955 5202809 Tu-16A ?t 1t955

5202207 Tu-16A ?-7-1955 5202810 Tu-l64 ?.11.1955

5202208 Tu.16A ?-7-1955 520281 1 Tu.1 6KS ?-11-1955

5202209 Tut6A ?-7t955 5202812 Tul6KS ?-1 1-1955

520221Q Tul6A ?.7-1955 5202813 Tu-16KS ?t 1-1955

126 TupolevTu-16
Ycrs,on Tacticalcodel Mandactue Notes Conslructi'tn Yersion Tacti@lco&l Manulactwe Notes

Regrstration datel nlnbet Regisllation date'

Tul6A ?-12-1955 i ozmrze ?-5-1956
Tul64 ?-12-1955 :6208129
?-12-1955 :6203130 Tul6KS ?+1956
?.12-1955 Tu-16KSR-2
?-1 2.1 955

:.......... li l9lll i l
, ozogzot Tu-16KS ?-&1956
.tiluo l_1?l*i : 6203202 Tu-16KS ?-6.1956

Tul6A ?t2-1955 t 3-2-1e57 (q? : 6203203 Tu-16A ?{-1956

Tu16A ?12-1955 , turOKSR'2-5/RubinlN Tul6K-1 1n6?

T!-l6Tsiklon-N CCCP42355 No l
'i Tul6Tsiklon-NM
Tul6A ?-1 2-1 955 t 28-9-1 957 (0 : 6203204 TUIOA ?+1956 840th TBAP, Sol'tsy AB

T$16A ?-12"1955
t24.8r95i 0
Tul6KSR-2 l7 Red/17 Black ?.12-1955 GK NIIWs/Akhloobinsk i ozogzos Tu-16A ?.&1956

Tu16P Rezeda Conveded under EleKron B&D : 6203206 Tu'16A ?.61956

Itl6-3 programme i azggzot Tu-16A ?+1956

Tu-16A ?-12-1955 zmth TBAP, Bobruisk. : OZO3Z0S Tu-16A ?+1956

t 1c2-1956 (nf) i Tu-16KSR-2-5/Rubin-1N Tu-16K-1 1-16?

Tu-16A ?.12-1955 i tu-toTsikton-N cccP-42484

Tu16A ?-1 2.1 955 : OZOSZOS Tu-16KS ?-7-1956

Tu-16A ?-12-1955 t 1041958 (0 i 6203210 Tu-16KS ?-7-1 956

T$16A ?-t2-1955 : 62m211 Tu-16A ?€-1956

Tu-l6A ?-12-1955 i 6203212 Tu-16A ?{-1956 ??TBAP,VozdvizhenkaAB

t 25-2-1957 (0
Tu-16A ?-1 2.1 955
Tu-16A ?-2.1956 ; 62m213 Tu-l64 ?+1956
Tu-16A ?-1 -1 956 : 62m214 Tu-l64 ?.8r956
Tl}16A ?-2-1956 t 1&1-1956 Kazanr i ozmzts ?.7-1956

Borisoglebskoye (0 i 620s216 Tul6KS ?.8.1956

T$16A ?-2.1 956 , 6N217 ?-7-1 956

Tu-16A ?-2-1956 : 62m218 24 Red ?.7-1 956

i ozosztg ?{.1956
li:l91 11IT : 6203220 Tu-16KS ?.10-1956

Tu-l6A ?-2.1 956. : 6203221 ?.8-1956

Tu-16K-26 , AZWZU. ?-&1956

TU.16A ?,2r956 i ozoszes Tu-16KS ?-1 1.1S56

Tul6A ?-2-1956 i 6203n4 ?.8t956

Tu-16A ?-2-1 956 : 6203225 Tu-16KS ?-101956

Tu-l6K-26P : ozmzzo Tu-16KS ?.1Gl956

?.2t956 i 620,32n Tu-l6KS ?.1 1-1956
Tu-l64 ?.?-1956 i 6203n8 86 ?.8-1 956 GIA Yegor'yevsk tec{ school

Tu-l6A ?.2-1 956 i ozuzzs ?-8-1956

: OemZgO
:.......... lilTl ll IT
Tu-l64 ?-2-1956 260lhTBAP,Stryy. i ozmgot ?-8"1956

t 2s7-1e56 {0 i oamsoz ?-8-1956

Tu-16A ?-2.1 956 i 620]303 Tu-16KS ?.9-1956

Tu-16A ?-2-1956 : 62m304 ?-9-1 956

Tu-16A ?.2-1 956 i ozossos Tu-loKS ?-9.1956

Tu-l6A ?.2-1956 : 62osgo6 Tu-16A ?-8-1956 ??TBAP,VozdvizhenkaAB

?-2.1 956
t 31t-1e57 (0
EX6 Tu-16A ?-3-1 956 , OZOS3OZ ?-$1956

Br7 Tu-16A ?-3-1956 : ozoogoa 1 ?-9-1956

Tu-16A ?-3t956 i Tu-16KSR-2-5 08

EII9 Tul0A ?.3-1 956 : 6200309 ?.9r956

ISPO Tul6A ?€-1956 2601h TBAP, Stryy. : ozogsto/60301 t ?"9-1956

: Tu-tsK-tt'tot 85 Blue?
1li l llll 11 :6203311 ?-9.1956

98101 Tu-16A ?.3-1956 :6209312 ?-9-1956

G102 Tu-16A ?-&1956 i oao$ts ?.9-1956

Tu-16K-26 18 Blue
, 62m314 ?.9-1 956

Tu-16K'26P : 6203315 Tu-16KS ?-1 0.1956

gBl03 Tu-164 ?.3-1 956 i ezmsto Tu-16A ?-9-1956 ?? TBAP, Skomorokhi AB

98104 Tu-16A ?.3-1 956
| 6zu317
I 2$5-1e58
98106 Tu-16A ?-3.t956 Tu-16KS ?.1Gl956

98106 Tu-16A ?-3-1956 30th VA/ssth TBAD/3c0rd TBAP. :6203318 ?-9-1956

Tu-16K- .. ? (ATC callsign t 24+1 981 nr Zavitinsk (0 , i ozmgts Tu-16KS ?-1 0-1 956

CCCP-0751 4 which is collided rvith An-24P8 : 620S320 ?-9-1956

An-2TP c/n '1

G 15242) cccP-46653 (c/n 47309m4) : 6203321 ?tGl956
38107 Tu-16A ?-4-'1956 | 6203322 ?.1 0-1 956

3ts108 Tu-16A ?.3.1956 i szmgzg ?-10-1956

3m109 Tu-164 ?.4-1956 : 0200324 ?.11t956 t 1s3-19s8 (0

ClB110 Tu-16KS ?.$1956 : 6203325 ?-1 1-1956

Tu-16K-11-16 , OZOS3ZO ?.1 1-1956

Cts111 Tu-16KS ?-5-1956 i 6zw3u ?-1 1t956

ets112 TuloKS ?.5-1956 : 6203328 ?-1 2.1 956

Tu-l 0K-1 1-1 6 | 62m329 ?-t1-1956

Cm113 Tu-164 ?4.t956 ! 6203330 Tu-16 ?.12-1956 ui

CG114 Tu-164 ?4-1956 402nd TBAP, BalbasovoAB Tu-l68
t +7"1e57 (0

etsl15 ?.5-1 956 : 6203401 ?-1 1-1956

em116 Tu-16KS ?+1956 : 6e$402 ?,12-1956

CeG117 Tu-16KS ?{.t956 : 6203403 ?12-1956

W118 Tu-16A ?-5-1956

'i OZOgq04 Tu-16KS M 16... (lndonesian AD ?-12-1956
62ts119 Tu-10A ?.5-1 956 ozos+os

6203120 Tu-16A ?.+1956 iS7-19s6(0 : 6203406 ?.121956

6203121 Tu-16A ?-$1956 i 6203407 ?-12-1956

6200122 Tu-16A ?-5"1 956 I OZOeqOe Tu-16A ?-1 2-1 956 Black Sea Fleet, Gvatdeyskoye AB.
t 31{-1957 nrAnapa (0
6C00123 T!-16A ?-5-1956 :

62$124 Tu-16A ?-5"1956 : 6203409 ?-12-1956

W125 Tu-16KS 25 Blue ?"5"1 956 :6203410 ?-1 2-1 956

6m3126 Tu-16KS ?-5-1956 , ozmctt ?.t2-t956

W127 TutoKS 16 Blu€ ?-8-1956 :6203412 ?-12-1956

TupolevTu-16 127
Construction Version Taclical codel Manufaclurc Notes Conskuctlon Version Tacticalcodel Manufacturc Notes
nunber Registrction datel nunbet Regiskation date

6203413 ?-12-1 956 7203701