To address your AMRAAM example; they need to update logic because different versions have different ranges, limits, thus different envelopes. I still think that you could “hardwire” AIM-120C onto AIM-120B aircraft logic, but your fire solution system would calculate everything by AIM-120B parameters. Your rmax would be way lower than your missile’s real rmax in same situation, and so on…

Since R-27ER and R-27AE behave 100% same until the terminal stage, i think that just fitting it in would do. Maybe not if you fit whole missile, because of datachannel identification and such, but surely if you replaced ER’s seekerhead with one from AE.

There have been certain structural changes on the Su-35BM for RCS reduction. Those cannot be pulled back onto the next Su-27SM2 upgrade…altrough N035, 117S and everything else can.

crobato, thanks for elaborate reply, but you haven’t told me anything i didn’t already know. I refered to the capacity to mount the R-27AE to ordinary Su-27S/P without any changes, to lock-on target in STT mode, and to engage it. In that kind of scenario, you can disengage when the missile reaches 20 km (or so), to the target.

Even in single-target engagement, even without radar changes, Su-27S/P would have distinct advantage with R-27AE. Keep in mind, that long burn Alamos have kinematic ranges well over 100 km, and once the AE goes pitbull, you can turn away. It’s a Mach 4 missile, thus, Su-27 would have an edge over fighters armed with earlier active AAM’s like AIM-120B, SD-10, and such.

But, yes, you need to update avionics if you want to exploit the full potential of the AE. However, i was just pointing out that it’s possible to use it without any modifications.

What was the maximum weapons load?

5 tons of bombs. Supported : FotAB-100-80, FAB-500M-62(T), low-yield nuclear charges.

Did it have five hardpoints like the MiG-25PD or three (i.e. one under each wing plus the centerline).

Three. If we “picture” the full complement of FAB-500M-62, it would have two bombs per underwing hardpoint (tandem pair configuration), and two tandem triplet configuration under the fuselage, counting 10 bombs.

Were bombs smaller than 250-kg ever carried?

It’s cleared only for weapons mentioned above. Thus, on tests, maybe, on sorties, hardly.

What was the maximum number of 250, 500, and 1,000/1,500-kg weapons that could be carried?

The example above showed a full complement, ten 500 kg bombs. MiG-25RB is also cleared for eight FotAB-100-80 maximum, carried in two-four-two configuration (tandem pairs under fuselage). The payload configuration can also be four FotAB-100-80’s (two-zero-two, without fuselage), eight FAB-500M-62 (two-four-two, or four-two-four). The full complement of FAB-500M-62 is also possible in two-four-two configuration, like the example above, but in three tandem pairs, rather than tandem triplet pairs, under the fuselage.

Credible documentation that i have doesn’t mention any other kind of bombs (except the heat-insulated FAB-500M-62T variants, and small nukes), and doesn’t mention payload mixture between flare and HE bombs.

Oh, and was R-60 support ever featured on any MiG-25 aside from the MiG-25PD? The R/RB/BM variants I’m especially curious about R-60 support for.

Apart for the export version of MiG-25P, no.

D-30 has already been improved for IL-76 and u need structural upgrades to carry heavier missiles and lighter avionics.

But not the whole new airframe, like LERXes and finned wingtips, canopy section, and nose downpitch, like MiG-31M features over MiG-31B.

Current MIG-31 has never been associated with Air to ground weopons in test. Only news report is longer range air to air missiles that is entering operatonal service this year. and there is no long range AAM competition all the work is given to Vympel for PAK-FA air to air missiles. See the AW&ST.

Not the weapons in test, but already active ones, that can be fitted on MiG-31F and BM variants. And thank you for that long range AAM info!

at best the cocpkit will look like Su-27SM. No big screen cockpit like Su-35 and new Flankers and Fulcrum does not share IRST from same firm.

Why do you have such an opinion? I mean, both of us could be wrong/right, but i think that Russian OKB’s showed their development capacity for nice cockpits…

I doubt it reaches Radar power of Su-34 that is much expensive program.

IMHO, the SBI-16A comes close to V004 A2A capabilities. Expensive or not, we are talking about deep modernization, and since the latest MiG-31 will house R-37M, it needs a big and powerful radar.

MiG-31F – multi-role variant
MiG-31BM – SEAD and ground attack variant of MiG-31F

So from what the article says, I’m thinking there are two multi-role variants – the MiG-31BM and MiG-31F. The MiG-31MF is the export version of the BM while the MiG-31FE is the export variant of the F. Am I wrong?

What’s the differences between the BM and F?

Ok, to clarify this issue, it’s indeed a same aircraft. The MiG-31BM demonstrator was bort 58 MiG-31F, with SEAD support, and that was pulled back into the MiG-31F program. MiG-31F was meant for domestic use, while modification of MiG-31F called MiG-31BM was marketed around by Mikoyan for possible export users.

Thus; MiG-31F had TV/LASER guided, and radar guided AGM’s / bombs. Mikoyan made modifications, and demonstrated it as MiG-31BM. The SEAD support that MiG-31BM brought up, was implemented in MiG-31F program. Since MiG-31F is for domestic use, Mikoyan continued using the MiG-31BM designation for possible export. Ever since the drop of MiG-31M and MiG-31F plans for domestic usage, and raisment of “deep modernization” variant, Mikoyan stopped using MiG-31BM designation (which meant modernized and bomber), because “deep modernization” is also designated as MiG-31BM, and referred to it as MiG-31FE.

Since I doubt the Foxhound will ever get exported, I’d prefer to focus on what Russia may do with its B/BS fleet. Will they be upgraded to F standard or will they call the upgrade BM?

No, the previous upgrade standards like F and M are out of the issue, because those aren’t compatible with upcoming Russian anti-air missiles. The upgrade should be called “BM”, as in “deep modernization”, as in Su-35BM. However, i avoid that designation, because it tends to confuse. I call MiG-31BM that “old” aircraft, MiG-31F with SEAD support, while i just reffer to future MiG-31BM as “deep modernization” MiG-31.

crobato, that site where i’ve seen the supposed Su-27SK/R-27AE picture is now missing it’s images (some hosting tags instead). However, there’s visual difference between R-27ER and R-27AE, RE has more curved nose, while AE has shorter, more sharp, coned one, and R-27AE has two rings on the intersection between seeker module and main body.

An unmodified MiG-31 lacks the IFR probe. I don’t think there are any major external differences between the MiG-31B and the MiG-31BS.

Like i said, there were two early production types of MiG-31. Izdelye 01 and Izdelye 01DZ. 01DZ has IFR. Decision was made to extend the range of escort and interception. First one to take-off with IFR was 1603, but the IFR was “dummy”, it wasn’t connected to fuel systems, rather just tested the “merge” to the tanker. Second one was 3608, IFR was fully operational, but some cocpit equipment (fuel transfer monitors) were not installed at that time. The 5209 was the first full-suited IFR’ed MiG-31, which also featured LORAN.

Serial production of 01DZ type began in ending of the ’80s, and 45 aircraft were produced, then the production was switched to MiG-31B standard (with IFR too, of course).

A lot of public MiG-31 info is referring about 01/01DZ. IMHO, those aren’t in service anymore, they were upgraded to BS and production B standard, while aircraft that remained in old configuration were mothballed. I haven’t managed to find sheer numbers to figure out the performance increase in modified SBI-16A over original SBI-16, ECM/ECCM suites, computers. However, while Izdelye 01 had a mixture of an digital Argon-K computer with old analog equipment, Izdelye 01B (MiG-31B) features fully digitalized systems. R-33’s were also upgraded to R-33S, again numbers are largly unknown, but several books i have indicate an overall 30% of interception performance increase in MiG-31B versus MiG-31.

Production was switched from 01DZ to 01B, while Gorkii plant started upgrading in-service 01’s and 01DZ’s to 01BS. 01’s were first brought up to the 01DZ level (IFR probe), and then to 01B. Hence, after the introduction of 01DZ, no MiG-31 was produced without IFR probe, and no upgrade was without a probe. Izdelye 01BS is MiG-31BS, S would stand for “stroyevoy”, meaning “operational service”.

Meanwhile, MiG-31M (Izdelye 05) came to life, with a helluva increased performance. Since no-one asked about those details, i won’t write them here, but altogether 8 MiG-31M’s were built, one was lost in the tests, one was scrapped at Zhukovsky, while first static test aircraft was “tested” beyond repair. What’s largely unknown, is that MiG even pursued small-scale production of Izdelye 05 aircraft components even when PVO stated that it won’t have funding to get them into active service. Years of MiG’s work and tests on the remaining five MiG-31M’s will be essential for the planned, state-funded, deep modernization upgrade. MiG-31M also lead to Izdelye 07, anti-space interceptor. Also known as MiG-31D, flight and functionality tests lasted for several years till the “great depression times” in 1993, at Zhukovsky. Project was cancelled somewhere circa 1993, with some sucesfull stories about those tests. However, Vympel’s ASAT missile, the main weapon, never got operational deployment, same as MiG-31D.

Project that we called MiG-31BM is just an export variant of MiG-31F, improved avionics, and radar computer (however, still the 01B SBI-16A radar), capability to carry R-33S, R-37, R-77 and R-73 AAM’s, H-31P and H-25MP antiradiation AGM’s for SEAD, H-31A for antiship operations, H-59(M) and H-29L/T LASER/TV guided AGM’s. Capacity for KAB-1500L/TK, KAB-500KR guided bombs (MiG-31F can be fitted with TV/LASER designator pod). Gravity FAB-1500’s also supported. Maximum bomb load is 9 tons, while MTOW arose to 50 tons. Ferry range is 2500/3000 km (wo/with droptanks), while at supersonic cruise range comes to 1200 km (without droptanks).

MiG-31BM is a downgraded version of MiG-31F (just like MiG-31E is downgraded MiG-31B), and i know for sure that it doesn’t have the capacity to use R-37. Russian Federation still has a stockpile or two of R-37’s that were low-scale produced before the Union collapsed, but the Vympel’s key cooperator of the project was left in Ukraine, and project was halted for years, eventually being replaced by K-37M by Vympel. Russia can’t export R-37’s because it doesn’t have enough of them, and K-37M is not yet done.

Neither MiG-31F or MiG-31BM received any orders. VVS stated that it won’t pursuit MiG-31F upgrades/production, and MiG-31BM has some interest in Syria, and Iran, but that’s just rumours for the time being.

So there are two MiG-31BM’s?

Essentially, yes. The MiG-31BM i talked about in paragraph above isn’t mean’t for domestic use. BM would stand for modified + bomber. MiG-31F tried to get the “best of both worlds”, multirole capability, with supreme MiG-31M interception capability, but with same key internals and structural components. (MiG-31M features a whole new sensory subsystem, airframe changes, and improved engines).

Nowadays, MiG-31BM would mean “deep modernization” that got the state-funding, and it’s close to project draft conclusion. Nothing else is known, but i could speculate a bit :

– No stuctural changes; it’s hardly that VVS will have money for full-scale airframe production. Same applies to engines, old D-30F-6, or bit improved D-30F-6M meant for MiG-31M, still old components.

– Range of PGM’s that MiG-31F features, while it will have capacity to carry R-77E/M and whoever wins the ULR-AAM competition (Novator R-72 versus Vympel R-37M). Personally, i’d vote for R-37M, because it’s an upgrade of an proven missile, that was based on a long-inservice missile.

– Cutting edge cockpit and computers. Sensory fusion. L175M EW suite, and OLS-35 optronics, same stuff like on MiG-35 and upcoming Su-35BM.

– Radar; IMHO it will be ESA, a monster of an ESA. RF still doesn’t have capacities to produce AESA techonolgy on the MiG-31’s needs-magnitude, however, see what power Irbis has, and what could fit into the MiG-31’s nose and be powered from Solovyov powerplants. It will be the most powerful fighter/interceptor radar ever.

but I’d like to learn more about the Foxhound, and what the Russians are planning for it

Service till 2020. First MiG-31BM prototype should finish test trials for circa two years (again speculation), and the upgrade process should start at the beginning of the next decade.