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


+70
BenVaserlan
Swgman_BK
Werewolf
Broski
lancelot
Finty
Kiko
franco
TMA1
Backman
limb
x_54_u43
Firebird
thegopnik
mnztr
Tsavo Lion
nero
Cyberspec
Isos
LMFS
Stealthflanker
Borschty
Labrador
eehnie
hoom
dino00
william.boutros
sda
GunshipDemocracy
Hole
Arrow
GarryB
The-thing-next-door
ZoA
BM-21
PapaDragon
T-47
eridan
SeigSoloyvov
Pierre Sprey
miketheterrible
marcellogo
kvs
Big_Gazza
Mindstorm
HM1199
Azi
OminousSpudd
Rmf
sepheronx
NEURONAV
gaurav
Mig-31BM2 Super Irbis-E
Austin
Backinblack
Flanky
jhelb
George1
medo
victor1985
KomissarBojanchev
mutantsushi
higurashihougi
magnumcromagnon
flamming_python
Kimppis
Morpheus Eberhardt
Viktor
Vann7
nemrod
74 posters

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    marcellogo
    marcellogo


    Posts : 634
    Points : 640
    Join date : 2012-08-02
    Age : 55
    Location : Italy

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  marcellogo Wed Apr 03, 2024 1:14 am

    It could be one option or another.

    Really, we knew about nothing about the PAK-DP so it's actually just pure speculation at such a point.

    What made both the MiG interceptors a class on their own were the combination of very high speeds with a LOT of autonomy.
    Al-51 core coupled with a D-30 like cold section and their signature multi stage afterburner would be not a problem to obtain.

    So it can be either a plane that take the existing concept into 5 gen or instead something completely new with quasi hypersonic performances but at the expense of a much longer developmental phase.

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Wed Apr 03, 2024 9:29 am

    Big_Gazza wrote:Not really, since a manned platform able to fly at M4+ over long range equipped with a powerful radar and sensors is far more valuable in securing a vast and mostly empty border hinterland than a slower craft equipped with hypersonics.  Security comes from showing the flag, in having a presence and being able to quickly establish a presence, not simply being able to shoot a missile from a distance. If that was the case, why bother with manned interceptors at all, why not just construct SAM missile bases every 1000kms along the Arctic shoreline?

    It's also a strong statement of capability and technological prowess.  Murkhan trash cnts still yabber about the junk SR71 and snidely criticise the MiG-25, but what will these exceptionalist cock holsters say if Russia fields a M4.2 manned MiG-41(?) with a 2500kms combat range equipped with 400km range hypersonic AAMs?  Not even full blown septic fan-bois like Dave Axe or the inbred retard legions of The Drivel  could explain that away.  It would be a shot across the Wests collective bows that would make the MiG-25 scare of the 70s seem tame by comparison. What will they do in response?  Write some more columns about non-existent vapour-ware projects like the long-fantasied SR-72? Double down on nonsense that Russia doesn't have the technology or the cash to challenge Uncle Scam, or that Russian mud-hut dwellers lack "innovation"? Razz

    It will certainly be quite a feat for the Soviets Russians and it would in all likelihood be possible to produce a Mac4+ interceptor. I guess we will have to wait and see, but I think 200 Mach 3 Mig-41's would be far more useful as defenders of the Motherland than 20 Mach 4 Mig-41's. Razz
    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6632
    Points : 6722
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  ALAMO Wed Apr 03, 2024 9:36 am

    Keep in mind, that the speed of a carrier strongly corresponds to the speed of the missile.
    The high release profile does magic to the operational range of the missile.

    GarryB, Big_Gazza and lancelot like this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38893
    Points : 39389
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  GarryB Wed Apr 03, 2024 11:48 am

    The MiG-31 didn't use Klimov engines. It used engines based on the D-30 engine core. The core was designed by Aviadvigatel from Perm but the D-30F6 engine itself was made at Rybinsk i.e. at Saturn. The guy who designed the AL-41 at Saturn used to work in the D-30F6 engine team. So its not like MiG are wedded to Klimov or something like that.

    The MiG 1.44 also used Saturn engines.

    All very true, but what I am saying is that it is not guaranteed that the engine will be Saturn based, because other companies make engines and an engine for a mach 4.2 interceptor has different flight requirements to an engine used on the Su-57 or any other type already in service.

    Will be interesting if they decide to make a drone with this new engine... the high speed flight comes from either a ramjet or a scramjet so the jet engine used for takeoff and landing doesn't need to be anything special because if it spends most of its time at very high speed the conventional jet engine will only be used for takeoffs and landings. Most of the cruising flight will be ramjet or scramjet.

    The engine core is the high pressure section and the gas generator. If they modified a civilian airliner engine (D-30) into the MiG-31's main engine (D-30F6) by changing the low pressure section, and adding an afterburner, they can certainly do the same thing with the Al-51 engine core.

    They could also develop a new engine type specifically for very high speed aircraft that could be used for new interceptors, but also applied to other aircraft like an upgrade for the Tu-160 further down the track that might allow supercruising or other useful features.

    The idea the PAK DP is supposed to fly at Mach 4 or 5 is a mistake by journalists. I remember the original press releases with actual comments by politicians in the security council supervising the program. The PAK DP is meant to have similar performance envelope to the MiG-31 but will be able to fire hypersonic weapons. It isn't the aircraft that is hypersonic but the weapons.

    Mach 4.2 is not hypersonic, and the current speed of the MiG-31 is Mach 2.8, and if you multiply the speed of the MiG-31 by 1.5 then you get mach 4.2.

    Coincidence?

    A 50% improvement in flight speed might be a goal... it is certainly a very strange speed in terms of known propulsion options... with ramjets being up to mach 5 or so and scramjets able to operate at much faster speeds it is a strange number to just come up with.

    That makes sense to me. It will not only be pointless to develop a Mach 4+ PAK DP but extremely expensive as well. As I've said before - it will be much easier/cheaper to develop hypersonic missiles instead.

    With ramjet propulsion it shouldn't actually have to be very expensive at all, though it is going to be a big aircraft and carry lots of fuel.

    If they don't want it to go faster then the new engines they are developing for the Tu-160M could be fitted to the Tu-22M3M with several modifications it could carry an enormous nose mounted radar and its belly could be covered in semi recessed launch positions for a range of different long range air to air missiles and also anti radiation missiles if you want to use it for a SEAD role. The payload capacity means it can carry more bombs than you could probably fit on the aircraft, and some new technology wing designs to replace the swing wing with something more modern... there is enormous potential for growth... start by removing two crewmen and adding fuel or weapon bay internal capacity... Maybe even a dorsally mounted ramjet engine at the base of the vertical tail so at top speed the air intakes for the two engines close completely and it s ramjet or scramjet powered in flight...

    So it can be either a plane that take the existing concept into 5 gen or instead something completely new with quasi hypersonic performances but at the expense of a much longer developmental phase.

    They are talking about stealth too, which seems a bit redundant to me... perhaps it might be a photonic radar debut platform... remember the MiG-31 was the first fighter/interceptor to carry an electronically scanned radar, so maybe the MiG-41 might be the first aircraft to deploy a new technology radar again.

    The Mach 4.2 might be a 1.5 times increase in flight speed over the MiG-31 (which could certainly be achieved with new engines), or perhaps 5,200km/h which is mach 4.2 at 20 degrees C at sea level... note that mach 2.83 is 3,500km/h and 1.5 times that speed is 5,250km/h, which is as close to mach 4.2 as worth worrying about.

    It will certainly be quite a feat for the Soviets Russians and it would in all likelihood be possible to produce a Mac4+ interceptor. I guess we will have to wait and see, but I think 200 Mach 3 Mig-41's would be far more useful as defenders of the Motherland than 20 Mach 4 Mig-41's.

    I don't think a mach 4 MiG-41 would be ten times the price of a Mach 3 MiG-41. The Russians have lots of experience with ramjet propelled missiles and some experience with scramjet propelled missiles now too so I think using the correct propulsion type achieving such speeds is really only limited by their capacity to design the right shapes and develop and produce the right materials to allow it to happen and I honestly think their design and materials technology is ready for Mach 4 planes.

    Before jet engines flying at supersonic speeds was ridiculous, and then when the first jet engines were developed they were unreliable and not very fuel efficient, but over time they matured and got massively more powerful and became relatively fuel efficient to the point where they were a viable alternative on subsonic planes with high bypass designs, but also the only game in town when it came to supersonic flight (other that the dangerous and fuel inefficient rocket options).

    New types of jet engine open up lower speed with turboprops and even pulsejets for drones and cruise missiles, through to supersonic speeds for turbojets and turbofans up to about mach 2.8 and then they start to become less effective and tend to damage themselves... a bit like the rubber tire on your car being driven on a salt lake race track at 200 miles per hour... it will rip itself apart.

    But a ramjet does not have blades or shafts, just airflow and fuel burning in that airflow, and a scramjet is even better because that airflow can be supersonic so you don't need to slow the airflow down to burn the fuel.

    The SR-71 could fly at up to mach 3.4 because its jet engines operated in a ramjet mode the blades in the jet engines were idling and not providing any thrust at all, it was bypass air in the turbofan design that operated as a ramjet that propelled the aircraft and maintained that speed.

    There was nothing otherwise amazing about those engines... no super technology, no special materials from UFOs. Just two turbofans that operated as ramjets at higher flight speeds.

    Keep in mind, that the speed of a carrier strongly corresponds to the speed of the missile.
    The high release profile does magic to the operational range of the missile.

    A mach 4 aircraft would probably be able to operate at 30-35km altitude, which for a solid fuelled missile like the Kinzhal would probably add quite a distance to its flight range without any other modification... the rocket is based on the Iskander so the first minutes of rocket fuel burn is to get the 4 ton missile off the ground and climbing and accelerating to flight speed. The flight range can be increased three fold by carrying it to perhaps 18km and mach 2.5 because launching from that speed and that altitude all that energy from the rocket motor goes into further increasing the altitude and flight speed, meaning it can climb to even thinner air and accelerate to much higher flight speeds which at the higher altitudes it can maintain for longer... meaning it can reach much further.

    It is essentially what they do to ICBMs... most of which are three stage rockets... in the case of the Iskander using the MiG-31K as the first stage extends the effective range of the missile from 500km to 2,000km.

    Being launched from higher and faster means it can go further... of course some air breathing attack missiles or glide bomb kits might not work at that speed, but they developed custom designed bombs for the MiG-25RB and the MiG-31RB so they could handle flying at mach 2.5 for long periods without spontaneously exploding... they developed special tail fuses so they could be safely carried and dropped at that speed.

    Note there is no high speed version of the AA-8 AAM so when MiG-31s carried them they could not fly at top speed or they would ruin them.

    Big_Gazza likes this post

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Wed Apr 03, 2024 1:27 pm

    GarryB wrote:
    Note there is no high speed version of the AA-8 AAM so when MiG-31s carried them they could not fly at top speed or they would ruin them.

    Where do you get that from? I could be wrong but that sounds to me like typical Western propaganda.
    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6632
    Points : 6722
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  ALAMO Wed Apr 03, 2024 1:59 pm

    Well, it is a logical assumption.
    R-60 was made to be as light as possible, which compromised a lots of things. Warhead including.
    The only two reasons why it even worked, was a fact that it had a continuous rod warhead, and was known for extreme accuracy - usually it hit the hottest engine blades.
    With such a missile, it is quite a challenge to make it withstand a high Ma speeds.
    It arrived MiG-25 and 31 as a kind of interim solution, so I guess nobody bothered to make it Ma3.0 carrier ready.
    It is not an accident that both carried a dedicated missiles of a very different line, even if shared parameters with tactical aviation missiles.

    GarryB likes this post

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Wed Apr 03, 2024 2:16 pm

    Well as you say it was already in service on the Mig-25 (Mig-25PD) years before. Why would it only start to be a problem with the Mig-31?
    But then again most of the time these Migs cruised at Mach 2.5 - hardly ever going up to Mach 2.8.

    The R-60M had some improvements. It was somewhat longer and carried a heavier warhead and the seeker's capabilities was improved - but that was it.

    GarryB likes this post

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Wed Apr 03, 2024 3:37 pm

    I just discovered an interesting bit in a 2007 Gordon publication on the Mig-25 where a major upgrade of the Mig-25PD was planned with weapons and systems from both the Su-27 and Mig-29. However it was found that the R-27 missile was not designed to withstand the kinetic heat of the high Mach number typical of the Mig-25.

    Such an upgrade would have meant a restriction on the Mig-25's speed and the project was abandoned. No mention is made as to the R-60's supposedly similar issue though?

    But lets assume there was an issue - why would they restrict the Mig-25's top speed for a very short ranged R-60 but not for a R-27? The IR version of the R-27 should also be very capable as a dog fighting missile and it has much longer stand-off range.

    Even more curious. Why would they allow this speed restriction to continue to the next generation Mig-31? Neither Migs were any good at dog fighting so at least restrict it with a better longer ranged missile like the R-27 Laughing

    GarryB likes this post

    lancelot
    lancelot


    Posts : 2684
    Points : 2682
    Join date : 2020-10-18

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  lancelot Wed Apr 03, 2024 5:49 pm

    I doubt the MiG-25 was taken out of service for reasons as pedestrian as that.
    In a time of limited budgets its low lifetime fuel guzzling turbojet engines were likely a much bigger reason.

    The D-30 turbofan engines, later used as the basis for the MiG-31 engines, had a remarkably high lifetime for Soviet engines of the era. Unlike the MiG-25 turbojets.

    GarryB likes this post

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Wed Apr 03, 2024 7:03 pm

    No no. The Mig-25 was not taken out of service - well not yet. What happened was the upgrade program - that would have turned the Mig-25PD into the PDM - was cancelled due to the unsuitability of the R-27 for high Mach service.

    Just a side note - the R-73 could in all probability also have been considered as it entered service just one year after the R-27. It was already slated for the Mig-31M but that program was terminated with the demise of the Soviet Union. It was only many years later that the R-73 was introduced into the Mig-31 family with the service entry of the Mig-31BM.

    GarryB likes this post

    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38893
    Points : 39389
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  GarryB Thu Apr 04, 2024 8:33 am

    Where do you get that from? I could be wrong but that sounds to me like typical Western propaganda.

    I agree we should be skeptical... ignorant western "experts" made up all sorts of shit when they didn't know or didn't understand.

    However it was found that the R-27 missile was not designed to withstand the kinetic heat of the high Mach number typical of the Mig-25.

    The excuse given, I seem to remember for the R-60 was that while in flight it reached supersonic speeds, it did not do so for 13 minutes at a time like it would on a MiG-31 flying 750km out to a threat and then being launched at that threat. The book was about the MiG-31 and didn't mention the MiG-25, but I would assume the same problems would apply.

    I can't remember where I read this fact/myth, it could have been talking about R-60s specifically in regard to MiG-31s or the R-40TD. Pretty sure it was in a book specifically about the MiG-31 but there are a lot of those.

    I will have a look and see if I can find it.

    Mir likes this post

    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6632
    Points : 6722
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  ALAMO Thu Apr 04, 2024 8:59 am

    Mir wrote:I just discovered an interesting bit in a 2007 Gordon publication on the Mig-25 where a major upgrade of the Mig-25PD was planned with weapons and systems from both the Su-27 and Mig-29. However it was found that the R-27 missile was not designed to withstand the kinetic heat of the high Mach number typical of the Mig-25.

    It was not much relevant I guess, as both carried R-40TD for a very, very long time.

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 29wrbn10

    R-40TD is still quite a potent missile, which is sometimes forgotten linking it with the beginning of a project well into the 60s.
    People are forgetting, that R-40TD is an effect of general redesign of an entire MiG-25 system after the deflection of Belenko. Part of it was a brand new, nitrogen-cooled homing head with 55 deg. lock on cone, that was locking on the target before launch. It was a really nasty shit, with a huge energy margin and really scary warhead size that was shredding the fighter-sized targets apart. Almost none of the crewmembers of the planes taken down by it survived.
    Functionally, it was a project carried almost on pair with R-27, the difference being that it was based on R-24 of MiG-23M system.

    Eugenio Argentina, lancelot and Belisarius like this post

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Thu Apr 04, 2024 10:07 am

    The R-40 also had the distinction of being the largest AAM ever. In that regard the early R-27's was almost half the length and more than half the weight, but offered better range and most likely have much better dogfight capabilities. But yeah the late R-40's were monsters! Smile

    GarryB and Eugenio Argentina like this post

    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6632
    Points : 6722
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  ALAMO Fri Apr 05, 2024 9:15 am

    R-40 target G load was limited to +/- 3G, so yes, we can consider R-27 to be slightly better in dogfight Very Happy
    But those planes were not designed for a task.
    Honestly, putting R-60/73 on them was a sign of scaling down the threat.
    Those were not required to take down a big size, high flying, and resistant target that has its own ECM suite anymore.
    The fact that R-40 proved to be so deadly to the enemy pilots was just a sidelobe of making a missile that was supposed to operate in very high altitudes, where the air is thin. A blast warhead had to be an increased size.
    When the Soviets started to redesign R-40 after 1976, there was a serious consideration to change the homing heads in much wider scope. Internal diameter was so big, that it allowed doubling the size of both the radar homing head antenna and the IR detector if compared to R-24. But they considered that an overkill, and that would null the benefits of combining R-24 components.

    GarryB and lancelot like this post

    Mir
    Mir


    Posts : 3116
    Points : 3118
    Join date : 2021-06-10

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Mir Fri Apr 05, 2024 3:50 pm

    Well a high flying SR-71 pilot at Mach 3 would probably not have noticed the R-27 whizzing by, but a R-40 would certainly send the correct "diplomatic" message - if it missed. Laughing

    GarryB and ALAMO like this post

    sepheronx
    sepheronx


    Posts : 8520
    Points : 8782
    Join date : 2009-08-06
    Age : 34
    Location : Canada

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  sepheronx Fri Apr 05, 2024 6:04 pm

    I wonder where they are with a replacement for MiG-31?

    It would really be awesome if Mikoyan can get back into the race and bring us a jet that could work in tandem with Su-57 for more advanced long range warfare and maybe act as a mini awacs too.
    GarryB
    GarryB


    Posts : 38893
    Points : 39389
    Join date : 2010-03-30
    Location : New Zealand

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  GarryB Sat Apr 06, 2024 9:03 am

    My understanding was that the big missiles like the R-40 and R-33 and now R-37 were intended for heavy targets so big warheads would be needed, but that the R-27 with its improved accuracy could also deal with heavy targets by actually hitting the targets instead of exploding near them.

    Equally the heavy missile has smart fuses that directed the blast and fragments in the direction of the target as detected on detonation.

    Like a claymore mine.

    My understanding of carrying R-60s and R-73s was after the heavy missiles had been fired for use against any cruise missiles that the targets had launched before being hit, where the aircraft chases down the cruise missile threats and hits them with these two types... both of which would be very effective in the role.

    The R-60 seemed sensible to me because it was a self defence missile for use by not particularly manouverable aircraft defending themselves from other threats, but then the high offboresight capability of the R-73 actually was even better from a platform that is not going to be pulling high g turns with enemy aircraft.

    They kept the R-40TDs in service because there was no IR model of the R-33 and having a big IR AAM was useful for chasing down receding targets as radar homing is not so effective against retreating targets, while a receeding target, especially one that is legging it with full AB, is a good target for IR guided weapons.
    avatar
    ALAMO


    Posts : 6632
    Points : 6722
    Join date : 2014-11-25

    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  ALAMO Sat Apr 06, 2024 9:30 am

    Having no IR version of R-33 grounds was the range.
    As a missile was designed for 120km engagements, no IR detector would work at that distance.

    In general, the development of R-40 was sort of a complicated deal.
    It was created on line with K-80 for Tu-128-80 weapon system.
    It proved that K-80 is not capable of being carried by high Ma interceptor, and redesigning it would be too massive and it would generate a different missile anyway.
    However, the mood for combining both was strong, especially as the K-40 faced multiple drawbacks due to the reorganization of the institutes involved.
    Flight tests of a mock up K-40 were carried with early MiG-25 prototypes combined with Tu-128 pylons, as dedicated ones were not ready yet.

    lancelot likes this post


    Sponsored content


    PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor - Page 26 Empty Re: PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

    Post  Sponsored content


      Current date/time is Tue Apr 16, 2024 6:19 am