

Yeah, I know. Technically this is a MiG-31K while this is a MiG-31BM thread. You got me. Call for yer lawyers. I don't care. I just want to luxuriate in Khinzhal porn and dream of these Death Avatars punching through USN Destroyers....

franco, dino00, kvs, zepia, LMFS, Mir and jon_deluxe like this post
Isos wrote:The most scarry thing about this weapon is that its carrier is always safe and it seems cheap to produce. ...
Big_Gazza likes this post
PapaDragon wrote:
They really need to get these things on more than just MiG-31 plus land version with booster stage
Too good to limit it to just MiG-31
Hole likes this post
Isos wrote:PapaDragon wrote:
They really need to get these things on more than just MiG-31 plus land version with booster stage
Too good to limit it to just MiG-31
That's the thing. They don't need to.
Mig-31k will always be safe because they will be used from siberian airbases far away of reach from enemy, and the few tomahawks shoot at them will be downed by tor/pantsirs.
And in the air they can't be intercepted by enemy aviation because they will fire 2500-2000km away their missiles.
So even if they have 20 of them they will always be able to fire 20 kinzhal at once and reload and relaunch 20 and again and again.
Having 300 plateforms isn't needed since you will never fire that many missiles at once.
Also useful to put it on some longer legged platforms like TU-22. A TU-22 can probably carry at least 6 maybe 8-10 depending on packaging. So 2 planes can fire a massive salvo of missiles and they can deliver them much, much further then the MIG-31. No one would think much of 2 blips on the radar until suddenly their are 12-20 missiles inbound. Too late then.
GarryB likes this post
GarryB likes this post
GarryB and Finty like this post
any commanding officer would wish for warp speed at that very moment
GarryB, George1, Gomig-21, LMFS and Finty like this post
GarryB, medo, George1, JohninMK, zardof, Finty and jon_deluxe like this post
zepia and Gomig-21 like this post
ALAMO likes this post
Hole wrote:Or FBW?
LMFS wrote:Digital FCS for the MiG-31, or am I understanding it wrong?
https://tass.ru/armiya-i-opk/13023671
LMFS likes this post
miketheterrible likes this post
LMFS wrote:Hole wrote:Or FBW?
Yes, that was what I was referring too... if true it would mean that the platform is very far from being retired, what I would find excellent news by the way, because having a PAK-DP with extremely long range and even higher speed does not mean that the MiG-31 has lost any of its use. Cued by an air defence including Conteiner it can be used against stealth planes almost without any downside and the 100+ available units cannot be easily replaced anytime soon. I see it perfectly being used in parallel with the PAK-DP...
Hole wrote:Or FBW?
LMFS likes this post
Hole wrote:I´m pretty sure that some of that new equipment will later be used in the PAK-DP.
Hole likes this post