Err, I have just figured out the codename Izdeliye 170-1 stands for R-77M. It is probably R-77M or the RVV-AE-PD (Izdeliye 180) they are speaking about.

Oops, you’ve pre-empted me.

In fact there seems to be more than one new development of the original RVV-AE.

According to the source in front of me, there is one lightly modified version with the lattice control surfaces replaced with conventional flat ones. Its said that the original lattice “Reshyotki” work poorly at high angles of attack and were only chosen because they didn’t require the use of very small electric actuaters.

But another reason for their replacement is probably due to the fact that lattice control surfaces were designed and are produced in Kiev in Ukraine, which is unacceptable nowadays politically!

Mind you they seem to be retaining the lattices on the RVV-AE-PD? :confused: :confused:

Found this photo of the Caspian Sea Monster on the web recently… well I’ve never seen it before!!

I was just thinking about the M2000 earlier today.

Someone mentioned that both the Iranians and Indians were not entirely satisfied with the MiG-29 in service. This got got me wondering as to how the Indians compare the Mirage with the MiG-29 in IAF service. They must surely have carried out DACT exercises between the two. What were the result/conclusions?

IIRC, some pilots in the Indian air force regard the Mirage as the more prestigious aircraft to fly than the Su-30 – after all, per unit price the French aircraft is more expensive than the Russian!

I also wonder how the Taiwanese, Egyptians and Greeks found the M2000 in comparision with the F-16?

The Starfighter had 40% lower empty weight than the Flogger but similar range and payload.

And therefore the more cost effective for a given airframe capability.

As regards the F-104’s strike capability, one has only to compare it to the contemporary Soviet Su-7 which is strictly speaking, in the same weight and power category as the F-105 but really only has the payload/range equation as a… well, perhaps the very earliest generation of jets such as the Gloster Meteor or P-80.

Which would you rather be flying in the nuclear strike role, the Zipper or the Su-7?

The discussion on the R-33 and R-37 missiles on the F-22 cobra maneuver thread reminded me of this article from a Russian magazine I bought a few months ago.

Vzlyot magazine, May edition, 2006 http://www.take-off.ru

Long range weapons

The first Russian air-to-air missile with a range greater than 100km was the long-range missile R-33 (product 410) with semi-active radar homing, accepted into service in 1981 for use with the MiG-31 fighter-interceptor. Further development of this missile was carried out by the state design bureau “Vympel” in a phased development programme focusing on the layout, warhead and guidance system of the R-33. flight testing had begun in 1989 on the air-to-air missile “product 610” with semi-active/active radar homing, as part of the MiG-31M modernisation programme. During a test firing in 1994 the missile attained a range of trajectory of more than 300km. The next stage was the fitting to the missile a new system of guidance based upon the active radar homing system of the RVV-AE missile. “Product 610M” was planned for use not only for the MiG-31, but also for other types of new and modernised combat aircraft.

Vympel is now, in competition with others, working on a new “product 810” missile, which will meet the demands for carriage within the internal weapons bay of the planned for fifth generation fighter aircraft.

The new missile provides for much improved tactical performance in both range of trajectory (1.5 times greater) and in improved reach of altitude against higher flying targets. As the armament for the future fifth generation fighter the new missile should provide a superior capability in long range aerial combat while at the same time providing a higher level of survivability.

Among the technical solutions being employed in the development of this new missile is the inclusion of a solid fuel motor with a double pulse regime of thrust with regulated pause period, an increase in the period of internal power supply to 360 seconds, all of which, along with changes to the aerodynamic layout; will provide the new missile with a greatly increased radius of action at all altitudes, along with increasing the maximum altitude for engaging high-speed targets to 40,000m.

The new missile is planned to receive a multi-function radar homing head with both active and passive modes of guidance (a semi-active mode is also being developed for any potential future applications). The ability for passive homing upon the source of ECM used against the launcher aircraft or any other radio emissions from enemy aircraft will be a new characteristic for long-range air-to-air missiles. Included in the guidance system is a high-precision inertial navigation system employing laser gyroscopes. Parallel with the INS there is also a satellite navigation system receiver fitted, which provides mid-course updates to the INS in order to correct any deviations from the proper trajectory due to INS drift. A two way radio data link is provided for both radio correction of the missile and to provide telemetry from the missile to the launching aircraft informing on the condition of the missile’s onboard systems.

The warhead can be reconfigured, depending on information about the type of target, three types of destructive modes can be used: narrow field, wide circular blast and directed blast.

A completion date for development of the new missile has been determined as sometime around 2013.

Yevgenii Yerokhin

So what we are looking at here? Does anyone else know anything about this missile because I know nothing about it. This was the first and only time I’ve read about it
Is it the future AA-X-14/15 we are looking at here?
Is there NATO designation for the KS-172 yet?

improved tactical performance in both range of trajectory (1.5 times greater)

That would give the missile a range of up to 450 kilometres right? 😮

So if this hugh missile is going to fit inside PAK-FA’s internal bay, and presuming that it’s only worthwhile to carry a minimum of 2 – or even better still 4 missiles, just how big is PAK-FA going to be?

“Product 410” R-33 AA-9 AMOS

“Product 610” R-37 AA-X-13 ARROW

“Product 810” R-?? AA-X-14/15??

what would have happened if US didnot went to Vietnam and Soviet had not invaded afghanistan?

Did you know that up to 4 or 5 million people may have died in Laos, Cambodia, Vietnam, etc. in the sixties and seventies; while up to 1.3 million Afghans died during the war there in the 1980s, they might still be alive if it wasn’t for the intervention of the Soviet Union or the USA in their countries. That’s a pretty possible “what if” if you ask me

The big “what ifs” concern modern day Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, North Korea. Recent estimates reckon that up to 600,000 people may have died in Iraq since the invasion in 2003 (although it sounds like an over-estimate to me) while it’s debatably if things have improved in Afghanistan in the last five years either.

So, using the hindsight gained from all previous interventions, one can safely say that such interventions create more problems than solve them. The American government has already said that there’s very little it can do about Iran gaining nuclear weapons and I’m pretty sure they’ll come to the same conclusion about North Korea.

Let’s hope that the doctrine of “MAD” is equally respected by Iran and North Korea as it was by the Superpowers during the cold war.

Does anyone have links to some official publications talking about the status of R-37? I thought that thing was still in eternal testing and certification stage, due to funding. If it has been produced, numbers would be very, very low. Just what is the weapon load of an average operation mig31 in today’s russian air forces? Does anyone know?

The question that probably should be asked is to what extent the MiG-31 itself still in service. I have got the impression that the FOXHOUND has more or less been withdrawn from service – or at least operated at a very low tempo. Has anyone actually seen the MiG-31 flying recently at a display or anywhere else?

Apparently the “Ishim” project which uses the MiG-31 as a first stage launcher for launching micro-sized satellites is still continuing, while there is a MiG-31M being used for testing the latest variant of the R-37 for Russia’s future 5th generation fighter, but there seems to be more mystery as to the status of the MiG-31 in Russia’s air force – more than for example, the F-22 in the USAF