Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Share
    avatar
    Walther von Oldenburg

    Posts : 904
    Points : 959
    Join date : 2015-01-23
    Age : 26
    Location : Oldenburg

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Walther von Oldenburg on Sat Sep 19, 2015 5:55 pm

    MiG-31 was not created for fighting other fighters. It was created as a high altitude interceptor of bombers and missiles to plug a gap in Soviet AD system.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Sep 20, 2015 2:26 am

    The MiG-31 and MiG-25 were intended for both high flying recon aircraft and low flying bombers and cruise missiles.

    Even the B-2 will fly low to try and evade Russian radar.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1334
    Points : 1341
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  AlfaT8 on Wed Sep 23, 2015 12:57 am

    Since we're going on about the Mig-25/31 i might as well add this.


    JohninMK

    Posts : 4546
    Points : 4603
    Join date : 2015-06-16
    Location : England

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  JohninMK on Wed Sep 23, 2015 1:48 am

    AlfaT8 wrote:Since we're going on about the Mig-25/31 i might as well add this.

    Thanks although it is OT. That link was the 25, this is the 31 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-FBWPmQcw
    avatar
    AlfaT8

    Posts : 1334
    Points : 1341
    Join date : 2013-02-02

    Marine Corp F-35B probably has a better serviceability than RuAF MiG-31BM, who knows?

    Post  AlfaT8 on Mon Oct 05, 2015 10:07 pm

    JohninMK wrote:
    AlfaT8 wrote:Since we're going on about the Mig-25/31 i might as well add this.

    Thanks although it is OT. That link was the 25, this is the 31 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0L-FBWPmQcw
    i know, i only posted part 1, if the reader wanted to continue they'd go to part 2 on there own.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Oct 09, 2015 4:50 pm

    Aircraft plant "Sokol" handed over the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, two modernized MiG-31
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3189
    Points : 3279
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  medo on Sat Oct 10, 2015 3:42 pm

    sepheronx wrote:Aircraft plant "Sokol" handed over the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation, two modernized MiG-31

    I hope those new MiG-31BM will go to Rogachevo air base in Novaya Zemlya island.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3189
    Points : 3279
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  medo on Mon Oct 19, 2015 9:42 pm



    Short video of MiG-31BM launching R-73 missiles.
    avatar
    SuperEtendard

    Posts : 1
    Points : 1
    Join date : 2015-10-24
    Location : Argentine

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  SuperEtendard on Sat Oct 24, 2015 6:05 am

    GarryB wrote:Well for countries with large areas of territory that want low numbers of aircraft to provide decent coverage like Iran, Canada, Australia, Indonesia... the MiG-31 would be ideal.

    Imagine some new builds with belly mounts optimised for 6 weapons, plus perhaps three wing pylons on each wing plus a wing tip pod for ESM pods.

    That would be 6 belly mounted R-33E or R-37ME (RVV-BD) missiles, plus say four RVV-SD medium range missiles and two RVV-MD short range missiles for export aircraft... quite a potent load for each aircraft...

    Like my country Argentine!

    We have a huge country to protect and a litle problem in the South Atlantic.

    A problem call Typhoon and F-35B (in the near future).


    Guest
    Guest

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Guest on Mon Oct 26, 2015 9:17 am

    SuperEtendard wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Well for countries with large areas of territory that want low numbers of aircraft to provide decent coverage like Iran, Canada, Australia, Indonesia... the MiG-31 would be ideal.

    Imagine some new builds with belly mounts optimised for 6 weapons, plus perhaps three wing pylons on each wing plus a wing tip pod for ESM pods.

    That would be 6 belly mounted R-33E or R-37ME (RVV-BD) missiles, plus say four RVV-SD medium range missiles and two RVV-MD short range missiles for export aircraft... quite a potent load for each aircraft...

    Like my country Argentine!

    We have a huge country to protect and a litle problem in the South Atlantic.

    A problem call Typhoon and F-35B (in the near future).

    A Su-30 would be even more ideal for Argentina over an interceptor like the MiG-31. The Su-30 does everything well and has a good track record against the Typhoon.
    avatar
    GarryB

    Posts : 16281
    Points : 16912
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB on Tue Oct 27, 2015 8:32 am

    The Su-30 would not be a bad choice for Argentina, though the MiG-31 would allow them to control the potential conflict being much faster than either the typhoon or F-35 and with its large powerful radar it should be able to detect targets at extended ranges and be able to engage them at maximum range.

    the Su-30 would be a potent fighterbomber, but then the MiG-31 has extensive air to air and air to ground capabilities too.

    The British would have to sit up and take both aircraft very seriously... I like the MiG-31 but would probably lean to the Su-30 as being cheaper to buy and operate and also more flexible with a much wider range of upgrade options.


    _________________
    “The West won the world not by the superiority of its ideas or values or religion […] but rather by its superiority in applying organized violence. Westerners often forget this fact; non-Westerners never do.”

    ― Samuel P. Huntington, The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1299
    Points : 1324
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  eehnie on Tue Oct 27, 2015 2:29 pm

    Berkut wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Well for countries with large areas of territory that want low numbers of aircraft to provide decent coverage like Iran, Canada, Australia, Indonesia... the MiG-31 would be ideal.

    Imagine some new builds with belly mounts optimised for 6 weapons, plus perhaps three wing pylons on each wing plus a wing tip pod for ESM pods.

    That would be 6 belly mounted R-33E or R-37ME (RVV-BD) missiles, plus say four RVV-SD medium range missiles and two RVV-MD short range missiles for export aircraft... quite a potent load for each aircraft...

    Dude, no one will sell MiG-31 and no one will buy a plane that is not sold. There is no MiG-31's to sell. The production is over, and producing landing gear components wouldn't magically bring production back, there isn't a gram of logic in that. No one is talking about bringing back MiG-21 or MiG-23 production just because components for it are still made.

    It is almost as if people turned off their logic or something.

    The MiG-31 is still officially offered to export. You can see it in this link:

    http://www.roe.ru/mmc/index.html

    (See Export Products -> Aircraft Materiel -> View Catalog -> Fighters, Bombers and Combat Trainers)

    Not sure if it would be new or used units, but Russia is offering the MiG-31.

    I would not count the MiG-31 as totally out of production.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3189
    Points : 3279
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  medo on Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:06 pm

    eehnie wrote:
    Berkut wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Well for countries with large areas of territory that want low numbers of aircraft to provide decent coverage like Iran, Canada, Australia, Indonesia... the MiG-31 would be ideal.

    Imagine some new builds with belly mounts optimised for 6 weapons, plus perhaps three wing pylons on each wing plus a wing tip pod for ESM pods.

    That would be 6 belly mounted R-33E or R-37ME (RVV-BD) missiles, plus say four RVV-SD medium range missiles and two RVV-MD short range missiles for export aircraft... quite a potent load for each aircraft...

    Dude, no one will sell MiG-31 and no one will buy a plane that is not sold. There is no MiG-31's to sell. The production is over, and producing landing gear components wouldn't magically bring production back, there isn't a gram of logic in that. No one is talking about bringing back MiG-21 or MiG-23 production just because components for it are still made.

    It is almost as if people turned off their logic or something.

    The MiG-31 is still officially offered to export. You can see it in this link:

    http://www.roe.ru/mmc/index.html

    (See Export Products -> Aircraft Materiel -> View Catalog -> Fighters, Bombers and Combat Trainers)

    Not sure if it would be new or used units, but Russia is offering the MiG-31.

    I would not count the MiG-31 as totally out of production.

    Considering, that Kazakhstan is also MiG-31 user, you could see ROE as supplier of supplies for MiG-31 in Kazakhstan and this could be a reason to have it in their catalog, but I don't think Russia offer MiG-31 to anyone as it is no more in production and RuAF reactivate them for their Arctic region.
    avatar
    eehnie

    Posts : 1299
    Points : 1324
    Join date : 2015-05-13

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  eehnie on Mon Nov 02, 2015 10:07 am

    medo wrote:
    eehnie wrote:
    Berkut wrote:
    GarryB wrote:Well for countries with large areas of territory that want low numbers of aircraft to provide decent coverage like Iran, Canada, Australia, Indonesia... the MiG-31 would be ideal.

    Imagine some new builds with belly mounts optimised for 6 weapons, plus perhaps three wing pylons on each wing plus a wing tip pod for ESM pods.

    That would be 6 belly mounted R-33E or R-37ME (RVV-BD) missiles, plus say four RVV-SD medium range missiles and two RVV-MD short range missiles for export aircraft... quite a potent load for each aircraft...

    Dude, no one will sell MiG-31 and no one will buy a plane that is not sold. There is no MiG-31's to sell. The production is over, and producing landing gear components wouldn't magically bring production back, there isn't a gram of logic in that. No one is talking about bringing back MiG-21 or MiG-23 production just because components for it are still made.

    It is almost as if people turned off their logic or something.

    The MiG-31 is still officially offered to export. You can see it in this link:

    http://www.roe.ru/mmc/index.html

    (See Export Products -> Aircraft Materiel -> View Catalog -> Fighters, Bombers and Combat Trainers)

    Not sure if it would be new or used units, but Russia is offering the MiG-31.

    I would not count the MiG-31 as totally out of production.

    Considering, that Kazakhstan is also MiG-31 user, you could see ROE as supplier of supplies for MiG-31 in Kazakhstan and this could be a reason to have it in their catalog, but I don't think Russia offer MiG-31 to anyone as it is no more in production and RuAF reactivate them for their Arctic region.

    I do not know it exactly, but there is a lot of Russian stuff of different types in use in many countries that I think still have supply for parts, but are not listed by ROE for export.
    avatar
    Giulio

    Posts : 163
    Points : 186
    Join date : 2013-10-29
    Location : Italy

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Giulio on Mon Nov 02, 2015 11:46 pm

    It is not enough to have an aircraft. It needs to have above all very skilled engineers and pilots. And again, what could happen if a Mig-31BM falls in the wrong hands?
    Libya had Tu-22 Blinders, but Libyan Blinders did not have an in flight refueling probe.
    Also some aircraft's components, I think, it is better that do not fall in wrong hands.
    The Carter administration gave the F-14 Tomcats to the Shah of the Iran, but soon after they fell in Khomeyni hands.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3189
    Points : 3279
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  medo on Thu Nov 05, 2015 7:45 pm



    MiG-31BM with AKU-170 adapters for R-77-1 missiles. Very Happy
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Nov 06, 2015 9:36 am

    Guess that means R-77-1 should be inducted soon.  Good.

    I would love to see an updated variant of the MiG-31BM with newer technologies used, as a new aircraft.  I mean, replace a lot of the metal with composite materials to lighten the aircraft as well as increase strength/durability.  As well, use newer engines (or restart production of same engines but with newer technologies to increase efficiency greatly) and obviously new radar.  A much newer Zaslon radar using newest techniques of manufacturing.  Maybe AESA.

    Such a beautiful fighter and lots of capabilities left in her.
    avatar
    Berkut

    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Berkut on Fri Nov 06, 2015 2:53 pm

    sepheronx wrote:I mean, replace a lot of the metal with composite materials to lighten the aircraft as well as increase strength/durability.

    Have you checked lately what speeds MiG-31 is supposed to fly at?
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:11 pm

    Berkut wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:I mean, replace a lot of the metal with composite materials to lighten the aircraft as well as increase strength/durability.

    Have you checked lately what speeds MiG-31 is supposed to fly at?

    No.  I havent kept up much on anything weapons related besides technology and thats it.  Rest is economics mostly.  All I know is it was Mach 2.8 maximum thats about it.
    avatar
    Berkut

    Posts : 190
    Points : 215
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Berkut on Fri Nov 06, 2015 3:39 pm

    And how stable do you think composites would be at M2.8? Point being; replacing metal to composite panels would be useless on MiG-31 and would not offer any extra performance but rather give worse performance.
    avatar
    medo

    Posts : 3189
    Points : 3279
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  medo on Fri Nov 06, 2015 5:23 pm

    I hope new MiG-31BM from the second contract for Arctic units will replace old RWR sensors with new Pastel RWR sensors, get optical MAWS sensors like those on Su-35, chaff and flare dispensers and radar jammers for self protection. They all must have IFR probe to increase range and patrol time.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Nov 06, 2015 5:31 pm

    Berkut wrote:And how stable do you think composites would be at M2.8? Point being; replacing metal to composite panels would be useless on MiG-31 and would not offer any extra performance but rather give worse performance.

    I thought composites were generally lighter and stronger than Titanium?

    I am just saying it would also help with RCS reduction, at least that was the main selling point for newer jets that replaced most metal on surface with composites. But that doesnt deter me from wanting to see newer made MiG-31's Smile

    Guest
    Guest

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Guest on Fri Nov 06, 2015 8:06 pm

    sepheronx wrote:
    Berkut wrote:And how stable do you think composites would be at M2.8? Point being; replacing metal to composite panels would be useless on MiG-31 and would not offer any extra performance but rather give worse performance.

    I thought composites were generally lighter and stronger than Titanium?

    I am just saying it would also help with RCS reduction, at least that was the main selling point for newer jets that replaced most metal on surface with composites.  But that doesnt deter me from wanting to see newer made MiG-31's Smile
    Went over something related in my university not so long ago. I would like to take a shot at relating these concepts. Metals like titanium are a lot more versatile than composites. For example, titanium has higher ranges of elasticity and it still handles heat remarkably well. Composites like ceramics (honestly don't know about their usage in aircraft fuselages) can handle high temperatures even better but have low ranges of elasticity. At the performance envelope that MiG-31 is capable of (such high linear speeds and still able to pull some rather tight maneuvers), composites may not be able handle what the MiG-31 is capable of.
    avatar
    sepheronx

    Posts : 7255
    Points : 7555
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 28
    Location : Canada

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  sepheronx on Fri Nov 06, 2015 10:40 pm

    Ivan the Colorado wrote:
    sepheronx wrote:
    Berkut wrote:And how stable do you think composites would be at M2.8? Point being; replacing metal to composite panels would be useless on MiG-31 and would not offer any extra performance but rather give worse performance.

    I thought composites were generally lighter and stronger than Titanium?

    I am just saying it would also help with RCS reduction, at least that was the main selling point for newer jets that replaced most metal on surface with composites.  But that doesnt deter me from wanting to see newer made MiG-31's Smile
    Went over something related in my university not so long ago. I would like to take a shot at relating these concepts. Metals like titanium are a lot more versatile than composites. For example, titanium has higher ranges of elasticity and it still handles heat remarkably well. Composites like ceramics (honestly don't know about their usage in aircraft fuselages) can handle high temperatures even better but have low ranges of elasticity. At the performance envelope that MiG-31 is capable of (such high linear speeds and still able to pull some rather tight maneuvers), composites may not be able handle what the MiG-31 is capable of.

    Awesome. Thanks for the explanation. I didn't know this. +1.
    avatar
    Militarov

    Posts : 5518
    Points : 5563
    Join date : 2015-09-02
    Location : Serbia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Militarov on Fri Nov 27, 2015 5:55 pm



    "The MiG-31 BM will not allow any stealth aircraft, cruise missiles or hypersonic drones to escape. This aircraft is capable of simultaneously striking out six and tracking up to 10 air targets."

    Sponsored content

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Fri Aug 18, 2017 3:18 am