The Tu-160 "Blackjack" was the first boss on the Nintendo game, "Top Gun, The Second Mission".

There is no comparison , the TU160 is the largest , fastest and biggest ordinance carrying bomber the world has ever seen , the lancer has bounced from job to job while really specialising in none

The Tu-160, no question.

The similarities are so striking, there's probably an interesting spy story to tell...

TU-160 more range and speed

The B1 can be refitted to accommodate nuclear payloads. Speed by itself is not currently the main priority. Stealth or low radar cross section avoidance. Total combined payload is the B1 because of everything that it can carry in its non-nuclear configuration. The T-160 does have a heavier basic payload and flies faster. That with it's white Skin makes it easier to track. If an actual nuclear war was to take place with another super power, the US advantage is getting in and out, not by speed, but low observability. Besides the skies being filled, it would be difficult to track a 900mph low observable aircraft designed to hug terrain for long distances. It's much easier to track a larger, more observable aircraft going mach 2. The B1 B's flying is incredible. I've seen the initial flight delivery at Dyess AFB. I've also witnessed a B1A crash. Still this aircraft will be amazing for a long time.

Tu-160 👍 Is better 👍

The B-1B Lancer is comparable to the Tu-22M but not to the Tu-160.

It's better to buy tu 160 than B1 lancer. Less expensive and also much better quality in most specs

Very very TU-160 Like 👍

Ironic how the Tu 160 "blackjack" isn't actually black

Both aircraft are outstanding and the thought that theyre both bigger then the massive B52 and Tu95 is crazy! Theyre are both massive cruise missile trucks the range of both, 👌!

Based on price alone it tells you that the lancer is overpriced and overhyped as is most American military hardware .

Can you do future of US navy and air force please ❤️👍👍👍

The Blackjack looks like the "Bone" had some cheeseburgers and put on some weight. They're both beautiful and badass airplanes.

Tu 160 surpasses in all respects, in addition, it does what it was created for, there is no new B1, but it should be noted that these are completely different aircraft and different tasks. Let's not forget that today the modernized Tu160 aircraft has become even better, outwardly it has changed little, but in terms of its characteristics and equipment, this is a completely new aircraft. In general, I like both planes, Tu 160 and B1

Of course Tupolev 160.... 🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺🇷🇺

TU-160 is Powerful but also Gorgeous while B1 Lancer is also GOOd.

Beauty and the beast.

Nice video and very informative and very entertaining and very satisfaction more videos.

Two air monster

Russia: B-1 looks good but mine is *BIGGER*

Usa and Russia are building the best aircrafts in the world .They are in equality in my opinion .

Thank you very much.

Got a video request: Can you do a video on the type 26 Frigate?

Buzz Totally awesome comparison video. Thanks for going through the differences. Great info and great narration

Your illustration of both aircraft is distorted to make both appear the same size. They aren’t. Why the manipulation?

If the US B1 Lancer Bomber was introduct October 1987 while the Russia TU160 Blackjack Bomber was introduct April 1987 that the Russia TU160 Blackjack bomber is a reversed engineer copy from the US B1 Lancer Bomber

Both planes are impressive but I prefer my Suzuki 2007

Don't know where you got your cost but the per unit cost of the TU-160 is a little above 200 million.

У них разные задачи , их нет смысла сравнивать .

Right assumption in the end. Respect.

The white Swan ❤️ I like how Russian build aircraft, especially in wings design 👍🏻👌🏻

Love Russia and Tu 160 ❤️ from Sri lanka 🇱🇰❤️🇷🇺

Nice

Tu160 is killing this puny B1 with its insane price tag. The Tu160M is stealthy as well.

Ту160 по всем параметрам лучше

I would have to say the TU160 has the edge here....But do super sonic, variable, swept wing bombers have a role anymore?

The B-1B has a lower top speed because its role was changed to a low-altitude supersonic penetrator. It's be more fair to compare the Tu-160's top speed at similar altitude.

Thanks for an non-propaganda video!

Tu-160 ❤

They are powerful I like

B1-b is comparable but slightly inferior to TU-22M. TU160 is in it's own class.

I don't know, they both look cool

Well, the Tu-160 is better, the weaponry is almost the same, the Tu had range, speed, & durability

Seller: what would you like? I have rather good b2. Buyer: mmm... I don't have much money... maybe you h something more cheap?... ;)

why is B1B still called supersonic strategic bomber, it is now subsonic at .98 mach.

I'll take 62 B-1s over 16 TU-160s any day

B1 not Nuclear potential

Tupolev 22 m3m vs b1 b Lancer .

TU160 really look like a white swan

Tu 160 now have the hipersonic missile kinzhal

the new TU-160M is the best bomber actuality

TU160 Best Bomber

Indian air force need b1 lancer

Which one can get closer to its target before it is seen on radar? Not much comparison there

This entire video essentially totally plagiarized the wikipedia article on the Tu-160. And I know this because I was reading its article while listening to this video

The Buzz. Why are you afraid to admit that TU-160 is way better than B-1.

So which one of these is in GTA?

Bomber American and Soviet Union Boeing B-52 Stratofortress 52'55'62 Tupoljev Tu-95Ms 52'56,62'65

I have few t160 in my backyard. I will use in ww3. Waiting for the right time.

If Tu 160 is 7 mil, I want to buy one

Их нельзя сравнивать, у них слишком разные характеристики

What does that big writing on the side of the Russian jet say?

Lol, she said b1b has larger payload. Eh, na

Another wise guy compares square with cold..... TU 160 is a strategic missile-carrying bomber, and B1 Lancer is a front-line bomber.... These are two ships of completely different classes! Ещё один умник сравнивает квадратное с холодным..... ТУ 160 это стратегический бомбардировщик-ракетоносец, а В1 Lancer это фронтовой бомбардировщик.... Это две машины совершенно разного класса!

Love TU 160 and Russian women

B1 much more design for current times and decreased detection

how come the b1 had to give up nukes

The white swan, ...it seems to be more powerful.

almost every meant agm is not yet in service...

Given their destructive power I don't think it matters which is 'more' powerful.

Russia's always had a history of putting engines on aircraft so powerful, they'll destroy the aircraft, Which lead's to shorter life of the aircraft! Like the Foxbat Mig 25, ?

By the way the B1 can’t carry hypersonic missiles as the US has none , they HAVENT GOT ANY

The one has better smarter pilots

Not comparable

The difference between the maneuvering between the Tu-160 and the B-1 is the B-1 is better on the maneuverability because of the wing span.

Tu-160 ☇☇

At 77.08 rubles to the dollar does this mean Russia pays 5,395,600,000 rubles per TU 160?

“Each” of them producing 220,000 lbs “combined”… so which one is it? Each or combined? phrase much?

TU-160❤️

Tu 160 Black jack

if you look carefully US and Russia share knowledge and technology then and now - imagine if the USA and Russin became partners and concentrate on the medical cure that war.

Apparently cheaper is better

Funny how the average observers in the West often cut the Soviet a slack when assessing their weapon system's ingenuity despite the persistent copying and "borrowing" by the Soviets of ideas, concepts, even the specific designs that originated in the West. The extraordinary extent the Soviet espionage infiltrated Western arms industry has been well documented and the stolen data's substantial contribution to their own designs well confirmed. It's a tenacious and fruitful endeavor spanning 7 decades - far more extensive, comprehensive and penetrative by several orders of magnitude than, say, the Chinese espionage that only perks up in recent two decades. Still, there is often the ready-and-willing granting by Westerners of the benefit-of-doubt when it comes to design similarities, whereby observers tend to enthusiastically propound, without even the prompting from the Soviets themselves, that the similarity based on outward appearance may be artificial, as it belies the underlying functionalities that could potentially be quite different. In contrast, little such benefit of doubt is given to the Chinese weapon systems, however, where almost every class of plane, tank, ship, etc. is dismissively written off as nothing but a cheap "carbon copies" of a supposed "original ones" that often times don't even remotely look the same (e.g. J-20 being a "copy" of F-22). Just imagine that Tu-160 were a Chinese bomber. The same degree of the visual similarity between Tu-160 and B-1 would have been sufficient for 99% of the commentators here to instantly pronounce a confident verdict that Tu-160 is obviously a Chinese knock-off of B-1🤭🤭🤭🤗 Not that the Chinese get to complain about "bias", as they deserve little sympathy so long as they keep plagiarizing foreign designs despite some genuinely impressive progresses in their own industry. *The interesting thing is the Soviets had been doing exactly the same (i.e. Stealing/copying and innovating/groundbreaking at the same time), at a scale that way dwarves that of the Chinese, yet they aren't subjected to the same stereotype.* Are the Soviet less Communist, less authoritarian, less oppressive, or less in any attributes that give the Chinese a bad rep? If they are equally "bad" (with the Soviets arguably being far worse in so many aspects), what justifies the double standard? Maybe simply because the Soviets are White & European, thus inherently more worthy of high esteem than the slant-eyed bastards who are nothing but Yellow Peril?

I like the design of b-1 Lancer, but it depends on how the piliot drive and make a strategy to counter the enemy...btw greeting from PHILIPPINES🇵🇭. More videos to upload❤️

It's interesting that you use graphs to show how the planes compare, but stop when talking about payload - the place the B-1B outperforms the Tu-160. You're certainly right that they're used for very different purposes. The B-1 can fly near the speed of sound at sea level in terrain-following mode to evade enemy radar, whereas the Tu-160 only flies operationally at high altitude. The B-1 can also fuel in flight, so its shorter range is not an issue.

❤️TU 116 RUSSIA 🇷🇺

My guess is 62× B1Bs beat 16 × Tu160s. 🇺🇦

This plane is straight up from a xerox machine the US should've made their own drawing board but the TU160 is effective over the time so just 3d print the old Russian bomber lol 😂

The B1 is for guys who like petit girls the Tu-160 is for guys who like thicc chicks

у них почти одинаковая максимальная скорость, чет тут слегка обманывают

Ту 160 это белый лебедь а значит он лучший

Enough to deter a war that everyone would loose.

TU-160 Very Very Better than B1 Spesially TU-160M1-2 ( 2020 - 2025 Upgrade )

Who copied who?

The b1 carries a way bigger payload if you know how math work lmao

TU 160🇷🇺❤️❤️❤️

White Swan Queen

Keep in mind that the USA spent 850 Billion for defence. Russia about 80 Billion.