Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Share

    Ivan the Colorado
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 794
    Points : 828
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Age : 20
    Location : Colorado, USA

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Ivan the Colorado on Thu Aug 20, 2015 5:07 pm

    higurashihougi wrote:Correct me if I am wrong but there was an export version named MiG-31E... but of course it has inferior avionics and radars.
    Talk about making one some time ago. But never went through.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    Join date : 2010-10-24
    Location : Slovenia

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  medo on Thu Aug 20, 2015 5:21 pm

    GarryB wrote:The standard undercarriage of the MiG-31 is already designed for rough strips... the two main wheels are offset so the front one doesn't create a depression and the second wheel doesn't dig deeper and bottom out the aircraft.

    Perhaps they might have some export orders in mind that makes new production necessary...  Smile

    Certainly the new Aerospace forces will want some and with the 300km range AAMs the Air Force might want some of its own as anti AWACS/JSTARS/Troop transport use.

    MiG-31 was from the beginning designed for operations over Arctic region to replace old Tu-128 there. It have specially designed undercarriage to operate from snow/ice covered airstrip, similar have Viggen and Su-34. MiG-31BM, which will be stationed in Arctic airbases, are not new build and will serve there for at least two decades. Plane is heavy and material of undercarriage could show signs of tired material and they decide to replace them with new ones, that they will not lost planes because of breaking of undercarriage legs. Anyway, it is wise to replace all tired components with new ones.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB on Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:15 am

    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...


    _________________
    “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

    Giulio
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 152
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2013-10-29
    Location : Italy

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Giulio on Sat Aug 22, 2015 10:55 am

    Once there was the Avro Arrow in Canada, theoretically very close to the Mig-31.
    Afaik, the Mig-31 landing gear is built especially to distribute the weight during high-speed takeoff and landings. A Mig-31 weighs more than a Tu-124 and lands at 350-300 Km/h. The Mig-25 had a single large wheel, but it did not weigh 40 tons. The Mig-31 does not have a single large wheel, but two twin wheels. The landing gear configuration of the Mig-31 is similar to the multi-axis configuration of a truck, not only for distribute the weight, but above all for the longitudinal stability during high speeds, above all if with the chute-brake. Many trucks have the last wheel lifted up and, when the load is heavy, that wheel goes down to touch the ground. People thinks that it is for the weight, actually it is also for longitudinal stability in the bends, when loaded. The Mig-31 is similar and afaik he is the aircraft with the most comfortable landing of the world. In the Arctic the lateral wind can be very strong, it could overturn trucks, so during operations with strong wind and wet runway it needs a special landing gear. In order to protect the main landing gear at high speeds and also to create less resistance with the gear out, the Mig-31 has ventral airbrakes in front of the gear.The Mig-31, like other aircrafts, is not licensed for dirty runways. The dirty runways should be treated BEFORE operations and, if the meteo is not satisfactory, the aircraft directs on the alternate airport. Only if strictly necessary, the operations with prohibitive weather are authorized. With a Mig-31 is like landing with a civil liner, but at 300-350 Km/h, in blind conditions error possibility = zero.

    Berkut
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 191
    Points : 216
    Join date : 2015-05-05

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Berkut on Sat Aug 22, 2015 12:36 pm

    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.

    Ivan the Colorado
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 794
    Points : 828
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Age : 20
    Location : Colorado, USA

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Ivan the Colorado on Sat Aug 22, 2015 7:57 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.
    I think you are misunderstanding GarryB. I understand that he is simply saying that an aircraft on par with the MiG-31 would be ideal for those countries because the role that the MiG-31 plays fits well within those countries needs.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB on Sun Aug 23, 2015 3:50 am

    Thank you Ivan...

    The difference between restarting production of the MiG-31 and restarting production of the MiG-21 or MiG-23 is that the MiG-31 is still the best aircraft for the job and for the foreseeable future for many countries.

    the problem is that production of the old aircraft is not so likely to be restarted because the actual demand is low despite the potential demand being very high.

    Australia and Canada will end up buying enormously expensive F-35s that will be no where near as capable of defending their air space as a MiG-31, while who knows what Iran will do... they might even want upgraded f-14s for all we know.

    Good old politics getting in the way of sensible decisions... not only would replacing their Hornets in the 1990s with Su-35s and also replacing their F-111s with Su-34s, they could co-produce some MiG-31s now and spend a small fraction of what they will spend on Super Hornets and F-35s.

    But the Aussie leadership hate the Russians... as does the Canadian leadership... so Russia has its supply of MiG-31s and likely wont get any more until a replacement is ready.


    _________________
    “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

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    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

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    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.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    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.

    SuperEtendard
    Private
    Private

    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).


    Ivan the Colorado
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 794
    Points : 828
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Age : 20
    Location : Colorado, USA

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Ivan the Colorado 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.

    GarryB
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 15482
    Points : 16189
    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

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 583
    Points : 608
    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.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    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.

    eehnie
    Lieutenant
    Lieutenant

    Posts : 583
    Points : 608
    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.

    Giulio
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 152
    Points : 175
    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.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    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

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    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.

    Berkut
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 191
    Points : 216
    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?

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    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.

    Berkut
    Sergeant
    Sergeant

    Posts : 191
    Points : 216
    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.

    medo
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 3052
    Points : 3150
    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.

    sepheronx
    Colonel
    Colonel

    Posts : 7302
    Points : 7612
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 27
    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

    Ivan the Colorado
    Captain
    Captain

    Posts : 794
    Points : 828
    Join date : 2015-04-21
    Age : 20
    Location : Colorado, USA

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Ivan the Colorado 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.

    Sponsored content

    Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Sponsored content Today at 8:21 pm


      Current date/time is Fri Dec 09, 2016 8:21 pm