By John Q. Hosedrinker 
On November 27, Russia deployed Tu-22M3 long-range bombers armed with Kh-32 supersonic cruise missiles over the Baltic Sea, accompanied by fighter jets. The five-hour flight in international airspace was monitored by foreign military aircraft, including Swedish Air Force QRA fighters who intercepted and identified the Russian bombers. The bombers originated from Olenya air base, recently reactivated for long-range aviation, and the mission rehearsed a maritime strike profile targeting NATO assets. This exercise, along with a separate Arctic Ocean patrol by a Tu-160 bomber, is considered part of routine long-range aviation training, but is seen by NATO as strategic signaling.
Read the original article here
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. Right, so, let’s unpack this. The whole thing feels like a carefully orchestrated display, a flexing of muscles after a recent, let’s say, *less-than-stellar* missile launch. It’s a “look at me, I’m still relevant” kind of move. These long-range bombers, the Tu-22M3 “Backfire,” are now being flown, accompanied by fighter jets, for a long flight in international airspace, which, as the initial buzz goes, had everyone on the edge of their seats… or at least, that’s the headline.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. These particular bombers seem to only get rolled out in areas where, shall we say, they’re unlikely to be at risk of becoming a loss. Now, it’s worth noting that the term “buzz” is doing some heavy lifting here. It likely means the planes were operating “closely approached” or stayed just outside the borders of any NATO airspace, but the headline is meant to suggest a more provocative move. This kind of posturing is a regular occurrence, frankly.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. A quick history lesson: Ukraine, at one point, had a significant number of these bombers and the Kh-22 missiles they carry. Then, the US stepped in, and the missiles were either handed over to Russia or dismantled under the Budapest Memorandum. Putin probably appreciated that.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. A lot of the reaction to this event seems to focus on the speed of the missiles. Yes, most modern air defense systems are designed to intercept fast-moving targets. And yes, many anti-ship and land-attack missiles are subsonic. However, when air-to-surface missiles are launched they are often supersonic. The Kh-32, the type often carried by the Tu-22M3, is a supersonic land-attack cruise missile. It’s not a hypersonic weapon, but flying at Mach 4+ over that kind of range is pretty unusual for a non-ballistic missile.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. Regarding the whole “subsonic vs. supersonic” debate, the argument that subsonic missiles are chosen for their efficiency and evasive capabilities doesn’t quite hold up. Subsonic missiles have a longer range for the same mass, but they also offer more time to engage them. Supersonic missiles, on the other hand, close the distance more quickly, making them harder to intercept.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. Another point that needs to be made is the capabilities of the Patriot missile system. It’s been brought up in the context of intercepting these sorts of missiles, which it has had no problems doing. It’s not magic, it doesn’t do anything “terrifyingly difficult,” it just goes fast, and that makes it easier to spot with Doppler radars.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. One of the main points that seems to come up in this conversation is that the bombers themselves are a bit long in the tooth. They’re old tech, and the fact that they’re still around is something of a testament to their longevity and effectiveness in the roles they’ve been used in.
Russian Tu-22M3 Bombers Armed With Supersonic Missiles Buzz NATO Airspace. There is also the obvious political angle. NATO’s expansion in recent times has been a direct result of Russia’s actions. The whole “NATO expansionism” angle that Putin used to trot out? He’s pretty much dropped that now, because it makes him look like an idiot, as the expansion was brought about by his own actions.