you dont need to nuke a country 50 times over to kill someone.

once will do fine.

If that one can penetrate missile defense systems and actually functions properly, duh duh duh

According to the Magazine Flight International the Russians have 300 active Mig-31s and Kazahkstan has 43 active Mig-31s. According to that same magazine the USN has 87 operational F-14s and Iran has 19 operational. (it records Iran as having 35 in storage, and the USN as having 109 in storage.)

that’s nice, although you fail to mention the year, times do change.

How about bite me burger boy.

Of course you want me to bite you, you dirty dirty boy, but alas I am here and you are there, i suppose you should resort to a cousin of yours or a local sheep?

The F-15 was brought up as a pointless aircraft in this pointless aircraft thread because it was a super fighter designed to counter a super fighter… that wasn’t even a fighter… it was an interceptor that the developed aircraft would not normally ever come anywhere near in real combat.

yes and you continue to avoid the question of how the F-14 was much more flexible in it’s role than the MiG-31 :rolleyes:

they should get what they can afford

Wow look at that price!..

Why didn’t India consider this? They could’ve gotten a BRAND NEW ship that would’ve been launched or nearing completion by NOW (given all that time spent on haggling for prices), HALF the price of the Gorshkov contract, AND could’ve imparted the option of either the MiG-29K or Rafale as it could be offered with Catapults.

Some one really dropped the ball on this one.

Both are upgrades for existing aircraft. The Russians are introducing many of the features developed for the M model to current aircraft. (BTW how many F-14s or SR-71s are in production?)

As many as the orders for MiG-31Ms from around the world 😀
Tell me how many MiG-31s are in operational through out the world (not as paperweight) vs the F-14 bub.

Why can’t you tell me?

because that is only so easy, go google it mr coleman, don’t be a lazy little boy.

BTW the Mig-25 was a recce aircraft of at least 8 different models (with different equipment like SLAR and IR line scan equipment), plus quite a few different interception models, and of course the SEAD and supersonic bomber variant with a 9 ton payload. (which consisted of 6 x 1,500kg (3,000lb) bombs with two underfuselage and four wingpylon mounted bombs)

again bringing up the MiG-25 when the subject is the MiG-31 and F-14

So exactly how many countries operate the F-14? 2? Soon to be 1? The Mig-31 is operated in several former Soviet republics that are now countries…. The Mig-25 was exported to more than just one country too.

How many MiG-31’s are actually operational vs the F-14, i bet you can’t answer that, or which republics actually do use the 31 :rolleyes:

The Mig-25 was brought up in regard to the fact that it was the reason the F-15 was created. The F-15 probably cost about 10 times more than a Mig-25 due to the fact that the Mig-25s capabilities were seriously overrated at the time. (now they tend to be underrated).

now you bring in the F-15 :rolleyes: geez, if there is anyone who likes to go off topic and prove a point about nothing, it is you my perfect friend.

All of them… except those that were used as test examples for the Mig-31BM (multirole aircraft with ARMs and other air to ground equipment), and the Mig-31M.

none of which are in production the latter two I mean.

It is an interceptor. What else can it do?

Far more than what the MiG-31 or MiG-25 can do, look at US campaigns in Afghanistan and the Iran-Iraq war

We are talking about stupid or pointless aircraft. Not evaluating the exportability of aircraft.

the direction we were pointing towards was about exports and you even mentioned it and now you’re backing off :rolleyes:

Besides you missed my point. If the point of the F-15 is to defeat the Mig-25 then it is a pointless development as they made the wrong assumption that the Mig-25 would be flying all over Europe trying to dominate the sky. The reality is that it would be defending the borders of the Soviet Union… certainly not somewhere where the F-15 would be for quite some time at the start of any war.

who’s talking about the MiG-25?

well for quality wise, I’d take the Rafale deal

but..

for all practical purposes I’d take the MiG-29 deal.. why?

buy something cheap, save money, get something that could be produced fast and replace them MiG-21’s.. why?

save money with the MiG-29 so you can invest more money into that MCA, T-50 thing or whatever it is. The MiG-29 should last until then.

The Rafale is nice, but takes forever to build. Who knows how long it’ll take India to acquire 125 Rafales