This is a discussion on Russian Air Force News & Discussion within the Air Force & Aviation forum, part of the Global Defense & Military category; What do you mean last of the great interceptors ever built? How was it great?
Just for the record I ...
What do you mean last of the great interceptors ever built? How was it great?
Just for the record I am not trying to do a country vs country debate AND I am Russian just for the record, however I would take an F-14 Tomcat over the Mig-31 Foxhound....
it may be able to fly very fast, very high altitude, and for a long period of time, however just by looking at it the Foxhound just looks like it gives off a LOT of RCS and it has pretty weak avionics which makes that part of it pointless since missiles fly faster and higher...
BTW what are the performance specs of the Zalson-M radar?
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,131
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69
After taking a whole day to research the Mig-31......someone has to tell me why was this bird ever made???
Its officially an Interceptor however it can do much more then that....but everything it can do, other planes can do better. Lets just single out its main role: Interceptor. It has a poor avionics(compared to other fighters in its class around the world), from looks it has almost no maneuverability....and its price tag is higher than any other fighter in the VVS.......what is honestly the point of that expensive ineffective plane??
Someone please prove me wrong and explain to me why this plane ever went into production.
You're wrong because of the time frame. The MiG-31 was developed in the 70s and entered service in the 80s. At that time it had some of the best avionics in the world, iirc the worlds first digital on-board computer, a powerful PESA radar, and a datalink (something rather rare for the time). It also had very long range missiles.
The point of this plane is to intercept a massed wave of strategic bombers coming from the US. This is far less relevant in the modern world, given that the Cold War is over. But as China is on the rise, and relations with the US are far from perfect, the VVS wants to retain this capability, and even upgrade on it to keep the MiG-31 relevant.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69
What do you mean last of the great interceptors ever built? How was it great?
Extremely fast, carried some of the longest range weapons at the time, and was technologically very advanced.
Quote:
it may be able to fly very fast, very high altitude, and for a long period of time, however just by looking at it the Foxhound just looks like it gives off a LOT of RCS and it has pretty weak avionics which makes that part of it pointless since missiles fly faster and higher...
At the time sensors weren't that advanced, and its huge RCS mattered little because it outranged most fighters of the time. It could fly in, fire off missiles at the bombers, and disengage without ever getting engaged by the escorts.
I've just come from the J-20 thread where some members were discussing the possible role for the newest Chinese aerial combatant under development, specifically
"There are some who seem to believe one of J-20s primary missions will be to take out awacs and aerial refueling capabilities BVR."
This struck me as interesting as it could mean a paradigm shift from the Cold War ideal of interceptors targeting waves of strategic bombers to that of fast, high flying interceptors conducting hit and fade operations on the enemy's battlefield support aircraft like fuelers and early warning craft, as mentioned above.
taken in a real world context, this possible shift in the role and targets of contemporary interceptors would make sense for countries like Russia and China to maintain (or develop) specialized interceptor craft to even the playing field against a technologically superior, network-centric, adversary by eliminating those threats mentioned above. Could be an interesting development
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,131
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69
Thanks Feanor, I understand a lot more now..
However explain to me how it could fly in, fire off missiles at the bombers, and disengage without ever getting engaged by the escorts?
Wouldn't it get tracked long before it comes close to the escorts?
Especially if there is an AWAC nearby?
Long range AA weapons. And bombers are a much larger target then even the MiG-31. It might get tracked. But it would move in very very rapidly, fire off and disengage using its speed to avoid the exports.
Long range AA weapons. And bombers are a much larger target then even the MiG-31. It might get tracked. But it would move in very very rapidly, fire off and disengage using its speed to avoid the exports.
Are we talking Cold War Era or Modern Day?
Because wouldn't modern day fighters/escorts track the Mig-31 miles before it gets in weapon range?
Feanor talks about both Cold War Era and present.
The Mig-31 Would face thougher adversarys today no doubt.
However, in a defencive role The Mig-31 capability in the Far-East of Russia were the territory it are patroling are Huge!
Seriously, take a look at world map.
The Mig-31 are a perfect assets for this, allthough there are allways the Service Cost to consider.
It gobbles a lot of fuel thats for sure.. But as i said earlier, VVS do not have any other jet in their pool that can do the patrol missions.
Even the Flanker which have exellent 'on station' time cannot cover the same area of air space as the Mig-31.
And one more thing to consider, the Mig-31 tactic would possible include an typical quad wave flying abreast at an high & fast altitude were it have weapon range advantage, get into the R-33 missile NEZ , let rip, guide the R-33 to its target. Then turn on AB and back to base. And they will allways have Flankers in the air to cover the Mig-31 Flanks, in any situation.
Consider the R-33 range, what good does it do for the enemy to track the Mig-31 if their own missiles cant reach the Migs in time.
This tactic was some of the Cold war era, used against Enemy bombers. But its a tactic that can be used to day against AWACS & Tankers too.
It will be very interesting to see the new Russian missiles spec as they enter service.
Sure, and they do cover large area from their respective locations, but in a real conflict they are soft targets for strike and cruise missiles..
The Data-link on Mig-31 can to some extend work with land based Hq and radar installation, which only improve the mig-31 situational awareness, but i'm not sure how far Russia has come on the net-sentric battlespace capability today.
Last edited by Haavarla; February 10th, 2012 at 03:41 AM.
Location: Under your bed. No seriously, take a look.
Posts: 11,131
Threads:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69
I see...
Yes Russia is a huge place to patrol however, doesn't Russia have ground based systems that can pretty much cover all their airspace?
No. Russian SAMs are massed around Moscow, St. Peters, and other major cities. There isn't even a continuous radar coverage over some parts of the Far East and Siberia, much less continuous SAM coverage. However when you take into account the Land Forces SAMs, and fighter CAPs, they can effectively provide air cover over the conflict zone. They just can't do it everywhere at once.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69
Because wouldn't modern day fighters/escorts track the Mig-31 miles before it gets in weapon range?
What exactly do you mean by modern? The MiG-31 primarily faces Chinese Flankers, and MiG-21 derivatives. They are not any more modern then any MiG-31BM. With those kinds of fighters, it can still effectively engage Chinese Tu-16 clones, should they attempt to strike targets deep inside Russia, and disengage before the escorts can close.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Haavarla
The Data-link on Mig-31 can to some extend work with land based Hq and radar installation, which only improve the mig-31 situational awareness, but i'm not sure how far Russia has come on the net-sentric battlespace capability today.
They exercise with AEW aircraft fairly frequently these days, but I don't know if there have been any major improvements in coordination with GBAD. The brand new Barnaul-T is supposed to address that exact problem, but so far it's only been delivered to the 18th Motor-Rifles, in Chechnya, for experimental exploitation. It allows integration of all brigade level IADS assets into a single system, and can communicate with VVS assets. I imagine once the Barnaul-T, and other automated C4I systems, are delivered in quantity we will see a marked improvement in that department. For the time being there is marginal improvement on that front.
What exactly do you mean by modern? The MiG-31 primarily faces Chinese Flankers, and MiG-21 derivatives. They are not any more modern then any MiG-31BM. With those kinds of fighters, it can still effectively engage Chinese Tu-16 clones, should they attempt to strike targets deep inside Russia, and disengage before the escorts can close.
I was not referring to China(Mig-31 would be advanced for their air force)
i was actually playing a scenario in my head of lets say....a B1 lancer
I was not referring to China(Mig-31 would be advanced for their air force)
i was actually playing a scenario in my head of lets say....a B1 lancer
Impossible to see the outcome as there as just too many variables.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Comrade69
Quick question, anyone know or can predict the RCS of the SU-34?
Sorry, not a clue.
The air intakes stright line to the compressors fan sure don't help any.
And from side view those large Verticals Stabz are a give away too.
Anyway, when you fill it up with various A2G armament , it gets even worse.
On the bright side, those Satan Ducklings are not that exspensive if one take a look at the capability.
They can strike at anything Land/sea with stand-off missiles or get down dirty for some CAS if needed be. An their operational range are exellent.
They should be easy to maintain as VVS incorporate lots of Flankers. They share much of the same parts, IMO logistic supply chain, like engines, etc.
Here is a nice Su-34 angle of all the Hard & wet points with various pylons. I count 14(include wing tip!) of em:
Last edited by Haavarla; February 10th, 2012 at 03:47 AM.
Is there any chart for the capacity of individual hard points ? Also the wiki entry says that it can carry Kh-65S and Oniks. Has there been any conformation on that ?
