Russia Defence Forum

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.

Military Forum for Russian and Global Defence Issues


    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    lancelot
    lancelot

    Posts : 228
    Points : 230
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  lancelot Sun Apr 25, 2021 10:25 pm

    GarryB wrote:A single Soyuz launch takes months to prepare and as you said its launch facilities could be compromised by the time it is needed.

    In comparison a MiG-31 could be located anywhere in Russia, or flown anywhere for the launch and because the rockets are launched from altitude and also at speed they are nothing like the size or signature of a rocket you would normally need to get such a package into orbit... you could transport a MiG-31 and 20 missiles in an An-124 most likely... 50 tons for the MiG and 80 tons for the missiles assuming 4 tons each...

    Soyuz is based on the R-7 rocket. This was originally meant to be used as an ICBM. Back then they achieved launch times in a couple of hours. Not months.
    The thing which takes the longest is fueling up the rocket. Back then they made special high performance pumps to do it.

    But if we are talking about small launches I think a much more viable platform would be the R-29 SLBM family. It uses liquid fuel so it should be easy to throttle for high efficiency complex flights. Also the launch platform is a submarine so it should be quite easy to hide.
    avatar
    mnztr

    Posts : 1090
    Points : 1124
    Join date : 2018-01-21

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  mnztr Sun Apr 25, 2021 10:53 pm

    You can probably modify the rocket to be much more efficient then any land based launch. Remember the rocket is designed to launch from sea level to space and from a standstill to mach 20 or whatever.. (orbit is M23.2). If you are accelerating from mach 2.8 and 20K m altitude the backpressure is much lower and you can also design for a much higher exhaust velocity, So the fuel needed will drop massively.
    avatar
    gbu48098

    Posts : 173
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2021-04-18

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  gbu48098 Sun Apr 25, 2021 11:07 pm

    lancelot wrote:

    Soyuz is based on the R-7 rocket. This was originally meant to be used as an ICBM. Back then they achieved launch times in a couple of hours. Not months.
    The thing which takes the longest is fueling up the rocket. Back then they made special high performance pumps to do it.
    Not sure what you mean by 2 hours but don't think soyuz or icbm level rockets are manufactured like that...lot if serialized but there are still lot of things that are hand made to get the precision and 100% qc vs statistical.

    But if we are talking about small launches I think a much more viable platform would be the R-29 SLBM family. It uses liquid fuel so it should be easy to throttle for high efficiency complex flights. Also the launch platform is a submarine so it should be quite easy to hide.
    [/quote]
    This approach is more realistic
    Tsavo Lion
    Tsavo Lion

    Posts : 5643
    Points : 5637
    Join date : 2016-08-15
    Location : AZ, USA

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Tsavo Lion Mon Apr 26, 2021 3:24 am

    ..if it is launching micro satellites that isn't necessarily an act of war you know.
    If an H-6 can be used to launch them, so could the TU-22M/160Ms.
    The unknown large Ms seen on MiG-31s could be new ASh/ASW/CMs, or drones.
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28920
    Points : 29448
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB Mon Apr 26, 2021 4:12 pm

    Could be manythings....we have not seen mig-31 launching orbit loads of anykind since that one offish....most experiments are carried out with controlled params and same with US shooting SATs or China....war time is much harder to predict.

    The US and China are not testing shooting Satellites with mach 2.83 fighter aircraft linked into IADS that has OTH radars and space tracking radars integrating into it for some pretty fundamental reasons... they don't have the option.

    For wartime to create capabilities you don't wonder if they might be useful... you calculate.


    Sorry I meant " outer space"

    Threats that just leave earth atmosphere can be engaged with all sorts of existing Russian weapons including S-400, and soon S-500 and their ABM systems in Moscow.

    anyway we have not seen them doing this in its existence so far beyond one or two experiements 2 decades ago. I will change my opinion if more experiments are carried out or deployments happen. Never said its impossible...

    It was decades before experiments were admitted to have even happened... so in ten years time when they reveal what they are doing now your opinion will change?


    Correct, not urgent or efficient especially now to use it in that role.

    Flying a MiG-31 up to top speed and altitude and launching a small rocket is vastly more efficient than preparing and launching a Soyuz launch.

    [quoteASAT role is not.[/quote]

    Not the BM model, but the K model that is carrying the Kinzhal missile was the anti sat model of MiG.

    Launching a missile into space or at a carrier at hypersonic speed don't require radar or other dead weight so it can be made lighter and therefore able to fly higher and faster than the BM model... which makes it better for ASAT and ABM as well as anti carrier purposes.

    Let's only talk on open source speculations.

    Why... do you think they will spend money making unlimited range nuclear powered cruise missiles but not care what it hits?

    nuclear exchange after math I am sure we know what we can anticipate now.

    Making sure no one survives is the best chance of making sure it doesn't happen.

    Soyuz is based on the R-7 rocket. This was originally meant to be used as an ICBM. Back then they achieved launch times in a couple of hours. Not months.
    The thing which takes the longest is fueling up the rocket. Back then they made special high performance pumps to do it.

    The locations it could be launched from are limited and the number of locations they would want to observe probably suit a micro satellite... a smaller target for debris and sending a dozen on different separate orbits improves their chances of getting the job done.

    One of the problems with the R-7 was the time it took to prepare for launch, which is why the US was so cocky in the cuban missile crisis... they found out the bomber gap and missile gap existed but was in their favour.


    But if we are talking about small launches I think a much more viable platform would be the R-29 SLBM family. It uses liquid fuel so it should be easy to throttle for high efficiency complex flights. Also the launch platform is a submarine so it should be quite easy to hide.

    Launching micro satellites from a MiG-31 mean a lot less rocket fuel need be used and it could essentially be launched from any conventional airfield across Russia.

    SLBMs and ICBMs could be used for lobbing warheads instead of satellites.

    So the fuel needed will drop massively.

    Indeed most of the energy of the entire first stage of a space rocket is to pick the entire rocket and all its fuel up and get it moving... often more than the weight of the rest of the rocket which then takes over and accelerates the now much lighter rocket higher and faster.

    Using an aircraft for the first stage dramatically reduces the weight and cost of the rocket needed.

    If an H-6 can be used to launch them , so could the TU-22M/160Ms.

    The advantage of the MiG-31 is both speed and altitude... the Tu-160 was planned to launch one because while it is slower and can't climb as high it can carry a much bigger rocket under its fuselage.

    The unknown large Ms seen on MiG-31s could be new ASh/ASW/CMs, or drones.

    The benefit of that altitude and speed of launch would be very high speed weapons... anti ship is a maybe, but drones and other options don't really make sense.

    Anti satellite and anti ABM missiles are most likely.
    avatar
    gbu48098

    Posts : 173
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2021-04-18

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  gbu48098 Mon Apr 26, 2021 4:47 pm

    GarryB wrote:[Why... do you think they will spend money making unlimited range nuclear powered cruise missiles but not care what it hits?
    Why open source based specs?
    If we don't then we will be bringing what Sr-71 can do and could have done in secret that was never revealed or what x-37B is doing and so on and also UFO's, flying saucers and what not. Rest all is repeat but no convincing evidence beyond experiments in that role for mig-31bm. Yes, if evidence comes out now or in future that it was actively deployed to address those threats beyond an experiment here and there then I will certainly change my opinion. Nothing personal here for me to diss the aircraft and I am still mesmerized by its records, I am just speaking based on intuition, open data, speculation and alternatives available to achieve same thing in its role as ASAT or sat launches
    George1
    George1

    Posts : 16050
    Points : 16547
    Join date : 2011-12-22
    Location : Greece

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  George1 Mon Apr 26, 2021 8:08 pm

    Training of MiG-31BM crews for Victory Day in Yekaterinburg

    dino00, Finty and gbu48098 like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28920
    Points : 29448
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB Tue Apr 27, 2021 7:19 am

    Nothing personal here for me to diss the aircraft and I am still mesmerized by its records, I am just speaking based on intuition, open data, speculation and alternatives available to achieve same thing in its role as ASAT or sat launches

    Does intuition and speculation only come from solid openly revealed facts that can be sourced?

    Why open source based specs?

    Putin described a cruise missile with nuclear propulsion with effectively unlimited flight range, would it not be intuitive to speculate that when it is launched they really wont know if it target will be damaged at all or not.... it wont arrive first, so lots of other weapons from Russia and even perhaps from China may have already had effects on targets in the location, so updates on the actual situation would be a useful thing.

    The programme for MiG-31K launches of satellites has been going for years and the commercial launch of micro satellites is good business and for the military being able to launch large numbers of ad hoc satellites is a valuable resource in case existing satellites are interfered with or attacked.

    Rest all is repeat but no convincing evidence beyond experiments in that role for mig-31bm.

    There are also plans for the MiG-41 which offers further development and improvement for any programmes for the future.

    Yes, if evidence comes out now or in future that it was actively deployed to address those threats beyond an experiment here and there then I will certainly change my opinion

    Would not want to force you to change your opinion, but speculation on this forum is acceptable.... there are even threads on UFOs if you look.
    avatar
    gbu48098

    Posts : 173
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2021-04-18

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  gbu48098 Tue Apr 27, 2021 2:37 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Does intuition and speculation only come from solid openly revealed facts that can be sourced?
    For most consequential things, one has to limit the context to something like real numbers, positive numbers or cartesian or coordinate plane and so on.


    Putin described a cruise missile with nuclear propulsion with effectively unlimited flight range, would it not be intuitive to speculate that when it is launched they really wont know if it target will be damaged at all or not.... it wont arrive first, so lots of other weapons from Russia and even perhaps from China may have already had effects on targets in the location, so updates on the actual situation would be a useful thing.
    If there is anyone project that I have doubts on, it is that one. Btw, any updates? Both US and Russia have the ability and past record in sending probes to great distances that carried nuclear power....I just don't think this would carry the pros beyond some initial probing...off topic and you will call me out if I deviate


    The programme for MiG-31K launches of satellites has been going for years and the commercial launch of micro satellites is good business and for the military being able to launch large numbers of ad hoc satellites is a valuable resource in case existing satellites are interfered with or attacked.
    Totally not the context for mig-31bm. I think you are grasping at the straws to justify....


    There are also plans for the MiG-41 which offers further development and improvement for any programmes for the future.
    Russia is not SU to get into that mindset of building one off things that add marginal edge if any and rather they focus on asymmetrical and economical alternatives......mig-41 is migs talk and thats all....interceptors of great speed may come in drones in future but piloted one is not looking good and odds are incredibly low even by 2040.


    Would not want to force you to change your opinion, but speculation on this forum is acceptable.... there are even threads on UFOs if you look.
    Yes but you would tag it as offtopic
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28920
    Points : 29448
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB Wed Apr 28, 2021 5:50 am

    For most consequential things, one has to limit the context to something like real numbers, positive numbers or cartesian or coordinate plane and so on.

    Actually I think the opposite... discussing things as systems is the best way to go forward because it introduces aspects not normally considered... for instance introducing 2,000km range anti ship missiles on its own is interesting but aspects like how does an aircraft with its radar removed like a MiG-31K find its targets to launch at such distances... there are no sensors on board the aircraft that could possibly detect a US carrier group even at 800km let alone 1,500km range or more that the Kinzhal can reach.

    Obviously they get target information from other platforms... satellites and OTH radar that can see 8,000km out from their positions would be ideal solutions for the MiG-31K to receive target information about approaching enemy ships, but as some of these radars also see rather a long way into space the exact same radars could also provide the same aircraft via the same communication channel information about low earth orbit targets that might be worth engaging... with an alternative suitable rocket as seen multiple times during testing flights.

    No information has been released but I don't think we are stepping into the boundaries of UFO technology or conspiracy theories about SR-71s to think it could be something they are looking at.

    If there is anyone project that I have doubts on, it is that one

    Ironically it is probably the most dangerous for the west... most cruise missiles fly very low to be difficult targets for air defences, reducing the range at which they can be detected, meaning to have decent defence coverage you need more systems located closer together to have a chance of even detecting an attack let alone stopping it. The air defence equipment Saudi Arabia is not exactly terrible, but also clearly not enough and it is probably better than most HATO countries including the US who pay even less attention to ground based air defence systems... most western HATO countries rely on aircraft based air defence, but also aircraft based attack, which means when being attacked their ability to attack is diminished and vice versa...

    The point is that jet engines are not very fuel or thrust efficient at low altitude so at low altitude all the way their ranges would not be very impressive... the vast majority spend the first major portion of their flight at medium altitude with a relatively low throttle setting to massively improve flight range, but obviously during that flight portion they are easier but not easy to spot as they are generally rather small targets.

    The new nuclear powered cruise missiles will fly at very low altitude all the way to the target so will be much harder to detect and if you don't know it is coming, or you do know it is coming but ICBMs and SLBMs have already damaged your country back to the stone age then they will likely have little problem getting through and doing further damage.

    I think if Putin had any doubts he probably would not have mentioned it... I would have good confidence in Russian technology developing nuclear powered systems.

    Both US and Russia have the ability and past record in sending probes to great distances that carried nuclear power....I just don't think this would carry the pros beyond some initial probing...off topic and you will call me out if I deviate

    Things that fly in the air crash and no matter how crashproof you try to make them a nuclear reactor power system that is damaged is a nightmare... except after WWIII has kicked off and then it is just part of the future for the survivors.

    It makes sense for a nuclear armed cruise missile... in fact they might incorporate the warhead with the propulsion as a sort of nuclear booster... the point is that when it is used Russia does not expect to remain being Russia... this is essentially a giant middle finger to those in the west it is directed at.

    Totally not the context for mig-31bm. I think you are grasping at the straws to justify....

    A MiG-31K is essentially a stripped down MiG-31BM... no need for radar or lots of other bits and pieces to reduce weight and increase speed and operational height... previously the useless old MiG-31BMs were gradually being introduced from old airframes because they are useful air defence aircraft in the far north and far east and that is still happening, but now they are also refurbishing MiG-31Ks to a lessor standard for essentially naval forces, but likely still linked to Aerospace Defence forces... they put its engine back into production in fact because of the aircraft they are using...

    I don't need to justify anything... the MiG-31 is a very important part of Russian air defence and will remain a cornerstone till the MiG-41 starts to take over in both roles... and to be honest the range and weight capacity and speed and altitude requirements for the MiG-41 will make it even more suitable as a space launcher ABM platform.

    mig-41 is migs talk and thats all....interceptors of great speed may come in drones in future but piloted one is not looking good and odds are incredibly low even by 2040.

    The non stealthy and stealthy current fighters can't do what the MiG-31 does now, and in the future will not be able to cope with a variety of hypersonic threats to Russian airspace.... most likely launched from US ships in the Arctic.

    MiG-41 is a given... it is a question of getting the propulsion right and it could be quite an efficient very long range very high speed aircraft.


    Yes but you would tag it as offtopic

    So what if I did... something that goes off topic is merely moved to a more suitable thread, or the topic is expanded to include the other topic... in this case I could change the thread topic from MiG-31BM interceptor news to just MiG-31 news so that MiG-31D satellite launch experimental aircraft and MiG-31K anti shipping aircraft could be discussed here too, though this is the Russia AF section, so probably a MiG-31K thread in the Space forces section... or a spruce up and change the air force section to the Aerospace Defence Force section... what ever I do I wont be warning or banning anyone... going off topic is normal... discussions do that all the time.

    Finty likes this post

    avatar
    gbu48098

    Posts : 173
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2021-04-18

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  gbu48098 Wed Apr 28, 2021 3:04 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Actually I think the opposite... discussing things as systems is the best way to go forward because it introduces aspects not normally considered... for instance introducing 2,000km range anti ship missiles on its own is interesting but aspects like how does an aircraft with its radar removed like a MiG-31K find its targets to launch at such distances... there are no sensors on board the aircraft that could possibly detect a US carrier group even at 800km let alone 1,500km range or more that the Kinzhal can reach.

    Obviously they get target information from other platforms... satellites and OTH radar that can see 8,000km out from their positions would be ideal solutions for the MiG-31K to receive target information about approaching enemy ships, but as some of these radars also see rather a long way into space the exact same radars could also provide the same aircraft via the same communication channel information about low earth orbit targets that might be worth engaging... with an alternative suitable rocket as seen multiple times during testing flights.

    No information has been released but I don't think we are stepping into the boundaries of UFO technology or conspiracy theories about SR-71s to think it could be something they are looking at.
    No, it is not that simple. F-35 is an example of a disaster trying to do it all and putting something in orbit is a precise thing and while its possible, it has not been deployed in that role back then or even less now....so far there is nothing more than an experiment and everything and everyone has potential, I will leave it at that.


    Ironically it is probably the most dangerous for the west...\
    Not really, west is an equal weight power and they have the tech and means to do it, my example of sending probes to outside solar system is to point out that ability. West is an offensive block and they don't care after the fact and that is why you see short sighted approaches in their approaches.

    The new nuclear powered cruise missiles will fly at very low altitude all the way to the target so will be much harder to detect and if you don't know it is coming, or you do know it is coming but ICBMs and SLBMs have already damaged your country back to the stone age then they will likely have little problem getting through and doing further damage.
    There are no materials that will take this level of beating flying for days and weeks at such low altitude and it will be as susceptible and inconsequential at those speeds as of now even at subsonic level....even RQ-4 has a good maintenance window after each extended flight and and its survival chances are no better if its not in the air already loitering. Idea does not mean realization or practicality. There are lot of ideas floating around and they usually end up in anime at best. Practical concerns will most likely put this project on ice.

    I think if Putin had any doubts he probably would not have mentioned it... I would have good confidence in Russian technology developing nuclear powered systems.
    With all due respect, Putin is not a mythical all knowing guy. It all depends on alternatives and whether they substitute this project in effectiveness, cost and other things. Poseidon is one and Avantgard is another to guarantee that effect.....so far we heard some undetailed acccidents but no one knows what exactly they are. I have my doubts and nothing is impossible in my opinion....


    It makes sense for a nuclear armed cruise missile... in fact they might incorporate the warhead with the propulsion as a sort of nuclear booster... the point is that when it is used Russia does not expect to remain being Russia... this is essentially a giant middle finger to those in the west it is directed at.
    They already have two middle finger alternatives in service. At best researchers may learn from experiments but mostly this is not a project that you get to see in open much if at all.


    I don't need to justify anything... the MiG-31 is a very important part of Russian air defence and will remain a cornerstone till the MiG-41 starts to take over in both roles... and to be honest the range and weight capacity and speed and altitude requirements for the MiG-41 will make it even more suitable as a space launcher ABM platform.
    Nothing concrete so far other than talk on mig-41. Even the izd 30 is still pegged at 2025. So 2040 is what I am saying but generally 10 years is generation shift now a days except some fundamental things.


    The non stealthy and stealthy current fighters can't do what the MiG-31 does now, and in the future will not be able to cope with a variety of hypersonic threats to Russian airspace.... most likely launched from US ships in the Arctic.
    Strategies are changing and access denial is getting much stronger and this plane most likely will not be replaced in manned version with better characteristics such as speed which was its strong point.

    MiG-41 is a given... it is a question of getting the propulsion right and it could be quite an efficient very long range very high speed aircraft.
    All we have is a project name on forums for now...we shall see if bits start showing up in more concrete form.

    So what if I did... something that goes off topic is merely moved to a more suitable thread, or the topic is expanded to include the other topic... in this case I could change the thread topic from MiG-31BM interceptor news to just MiG-31 news so that MiG-31D satellite launch experimental aircraft and MiG-31K anti shipping aircraft could be discussed here too, though this is the Russia AF section, so probably a MiG-31K thread in the Space forces section... or a spruce up and change the air force section to the Aerospace Defence Force section... what ever I do I wont be warning or banning anyone... going off topic is normal... discussions do that all the time.
    I am trying to respect your rules and guidelines to keep it as relevant as I can without being accused of "trolling"...
    GarryB
    GarryB

    Posts : 28920
    Points : 29448
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  GarryB Thu Apr 29, 2021 7:45 am

    No, it is not that simple. F-35 is an example of a disaster trying to do it all and putting something in orbit is a precise thing and while its possible, it has not been deployed in that role back then or even less now....so far there is nothing more than an experiment and everything and everyone has potential, I will leave it at that.

    I don't agree. The F-35 was a disaster because they are more focused on making it cancel proof than making it good and affordable... by copying the way they made the C-17 cancel proof they knew they were introducing problems and costs that were totally unnecessary, but they had the added problem of having to make a Harrier replacement as well as an F-16 replacement... all stealthy.

    What they should have done was make two versions instead of three... make the two naval models... the fixed wing cat launched model and market it with ground based cats and cable recovery systems so it can operate from damaged airfields on land, and make the VSTOL version different, so the ship and land based conventional take off model was slimmer and lighter and faster and much better... make the Harrier version better with full thrust vectoring to compensate for extra drag and weight... and don't spread their production all across the poor areas of the US... centralise it... and get it working before starting mass production.... at least get the problems below 100 and zero tolerance for the critical problems that are potentially lethal to the pilot of fatal for the aircraft.

    The purpose of the MiG-31D was specifically ABM missions, and the requirements of the MiG-31K pretty much match those conditions.

    ABM programmes are going forward in Russia, one of the biggest is the S-500 missile which is on the verge of entering service... it would be an interesting weapon for the MiG-31 to carry.

    Not really, west is an equal weight power and they have the tech and means to do it, my example of sending probes to outside solar system is to point out that ability. West is an offensive block and they don't care after the fact and that is why you see short sighted approaches in their approaches.

    It matches Russias policy of avoiding war rather than having to fight a pointless one, and the technology will likely be useful for a range of other uses too... mostly in space.

    There are no materials that will take this level of beating flying for days and weeks at such low altitude and it will be as susceptible and inconsequential at those speeds as of now even at subsonic level.

    What are you talking about... they can make cruise missiles able to fly for very long periods at low altitude at subsonic speeds... that would be pretty straight forward... and it wont be for years.. but months should be easily achievable.

    Idea does not mean realization or practicality.

    When it has been mentioned as a new system that will enter service I would think it is therefore expected... despite all the naysayers in the west... most of which knew Russia had long range cruise missiles to hit point targets, but didn't realise they actually worked till they were used in Syria because they are so censored stupid you have to show them for them to understand.

    If you read the Putin thread you will realise the problem is not just diplomats and experts on Russia being dumbed down, but western experts thought they were on their own in terms of military technology and that the west was supreme and unchallenged... many honestly thought Russian aircraft designers were finished and by now as HATO countries introduced F-35s that Russia would be begging to buy up their old F-16s to replace their old planes...

    There are lot of ideas floating around and they usually end up in anime at best. Practical concerns will most likely put this project on ice.

    What practical concerns? It is perfect.

    With all due respect, Putin is not a mythical all knowing guy.

    No, he is not, but he is also not the guy to brag about something that doesn't work and can't be realised... like Star Wars or something...

    It all depends on alternatives and whether they substitute this project in effectiveness, cost and other things. Poseidon is one and Avantgard is another to guarantee that effect.....so far we heard some undetailed acccidents but no one knows what exactly they are. I have my doubts and nothing is impossible in my opinion....

    Why would they spend money and time and effort developing different systems that do different things and require different levels and areas of technology competence, only to end up picking one and dropping the rest?

    Why not go with all three?

    It would be harder for the west to deal with all three rather than any particular one.

    They already have two middle finger alternatives in service.

    Many heads to the Hydra they are fighting....

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 14385110

    At best researchers may learn from experiments but mostly this is not a project that you get to see in open much if at all.

    I expect we will hear when it enters operational service...

    This sort of revenge weapon makes little sense as a secret...

    Nothing concrete so far other than talk on mig-41. Even the izd 30 is still pegged at 2025. So 2040 is what I am saying but generally 10 years is generation shift now a days except some fundamental things

    When you design things for a living the first thing you do when a job is completed... ie MiG-31... is to start working on its replacement.... because they do take a while, but 20 years is just bullshit.

    They have stated they want something flying by 2028 and entering service to replace the MiG-31 just after that.

    Strategies are changing and access denial is getting much stronger and this plane most likely will not be replaced in manned version with better characteristics such as speed which was its strong point.

    They have never mentioned the idea of unmanned interceptor aircraft... they do have unmanned interceptor missiles... S-400, and S-500 on the way.

    I am trying to respect your rules and guidelines to keep it as relevant as I can without being accused of "trolling"...

    Such respect and following of rules is appreciated.

    Ignore the black helicopter currently flying around your house... Twisted Evil

    Just because you are paranoid does not mean the whole world isn't out to get you.

    I understand your caution, and please do continue to follow the rules but do relax and try to enjoy the forum too. Very Happy
    avatar
    gbu48098

    Posts : 173
    Points : 175
    Join date : 2021-04-18

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  gbu48098 Thu Apr 29, 2021 12:49 pm

    GarryB wrote:

    The purpose of the MiG-31D was specifically ABM missions, and the requirements of the MiG-31K pretty much match those conditions.
    Except there are no known ASAT mig-31D squads beyond experimental modifications and given that designation. All experiment related modifications get their own names most of the time. No, any software heavy one like f-35 is a bomb for obsolescence and continuous nonsense of introducing more complexity.

    ABM programmes are going forward in Russia, one of the biggest is the S-500 missile which is on the verge of entering service... it would be an interesting weapon for the MiG-31 to carry.
    Has nothing to do with mig-31, I already said ground or naval abm makes more sense....

    It matches Russias policy of avoiding war rather than having to fight a pointless one, and the technology will likely be useful for a range of other uses too... mostly in space.
    Like I said we shall see, not much progress leaked on this one.


    What are you talking about... they can make cruise missiles able to fly for very long periods at low altitude at subsonic speeds... that would be pretty straight forward... and it wont be for years.. but months should be easily achievable.
    There are no known examples of things that loiter at low altitudes beyond few hours....even RQ-4 requires maintenance for as little as one mission. Nuclear reactor is not the only thing, there are other elements in a missile. This has no practical sense to it....give examples

    I
    When it has been mentioned as a new system that will enter service I would think it is therefore expected... despite all the naysayers in the west... most of which knew Russia had long range cruise missiles to hit point targets, but didn't realise they actually worked till they were used in Syria because they are so  censored  stupid you have to show them for them to understand.

    If you read the Putin thread you will realise the problem is not just diplomats and experts on Russia being dumbed down, but western experts thought they were on their own in terms of military technology and that the west was supreme and unchallenged... many honestly thought Russian aircraft designers were finished and by now as HATO countries introduced F-35s that Russia would be begging to buy up their old F-16s to replace their old planes...
    For every 1 thing that sees market entry there are 10 at the least that don't. While Russian's may be some super brilliant people in your mind, reality is world is not overflowing with their products and there are equally and arguably other people that were more successful than them. Every power has their own strategy and they build things based on that.

    Rest is kinda boring as I don't believe or read or pay attention to every dick that opens their mouth on internet to talk their greatness -- referring to politicians, generals or news baits


    What practical concerns? It is perfect.
    There are no added benefits to this and US/west can come up with dirty bomb delivery mechanisms. Good thing about west at least back then is they are fucking soviet union dumb....now they are the new soviet union.



    No, he is not, but he is also not the guy to brag about something that doesn't work and can't be realised... like Star Wars or something...
    He got it wrong many times too and therefore what he says also falls under critical thought process scanner for me. I work mostly through what I put together, I generally do not go with prob 0 or p1


    Why would they spend money and time and effort developing different systems that do different things and require different levels and areas of technology competence, only to end up picking one and dropping the rest?
    Spending money on unknown things is research but does not mean all research will come to fruition.

    Why not go with all three?
    It would be harder for the west to deal with all three rather than any particular one.
    POssibly insurance sort of hedging based on opponents steps....you don't have to be fanboy of anyone or anything, its ok to take a critical or objective line of thinking and in the lack of absence of data you can even dare to speculate on the outcome

    Many heads to the Hydra they are fighting....
    Yet you talk about cost and optimizations on other things.....no need to be soviet obsessive.


    I expect we will hear when it enters operational service...

    This sort of revenge weapon makes little sense as a secret...
    Sure, lets wait. We can make it interesting....


    When you design things for a living the first thing you do when a job is completed... ie MiG-31... is to start working on its replacement.... because they do take a while, but 20 years is just bullshit.

    They have stated they want something flying by 2028 and entering service to replace the MiG-31 just after that.
    They did not even get much simpler things that exist in the world on time or ever.....I have not seen any practical bits towards agreeing with you. We can reserve until some of your optimism shows up in practical sense.


    They have never mentioned the idea of unmanned interceptor aircraft... they do have unmanned interceptor missiles... S-400, and S-500 on the way.
    No, they did build s-70. No objective data to support mig-41 other than talk and bluster at this time.


    Such respect and following of rules is appreciated.

    Ignore the black helicopter currently flying around your house...  Twisted Evil

    Just because you are paranoid does not mean the whole world isn't out to get you.

    I understand your caution, and please do continue to follow the rules but do relax and try to enjoy the forum too.  Very Happy
    I am not paranoid but you did point me on extremely stretched out things while your veteran members keep breaking rules every other post. I don't really care of getting banned either but your rules are reasonable so I try to respect and as an engineer I like to apply proper domains and reasonability to an argument.

    Sponsored content

    MiG-31BM Interceptor: News - Page 34 Empty Re: MiG-31BM Interceptor: News

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Thu May 06, 2021 5:37 pm