star49It’s not the missile’s motor alone, or the fighter’s radar that determine whether or not a SAM/AAM can be engaged. It’s a similar notion to what happened in Desert Storm when Patriot missiles were fired at Scuds. Engaging a small, extremely fast target requires specialized fuzing compared with what is necessary to engage an aircraft, to ensure a kill. If the warhead doesn’t detonate at the right time, it’s not gonna work with a high margin of reliability. I’m fairly confident that the MIG’s AAMs aren’t gonna be using hit to kill methods against an AMRAAM or Sidewinder, unless you can provide some supporting documentation, stating such things.
Desert storm was 20 years ago. Now new MIG-31BM is claimed to intercept both Stealth objects and supersonic & hypersonic vehicles. Only missiles can fly at hypersonic speeds.
star49What has happened in the last week IS NOT an example of classic capitalist models. It is an example of very poor economic and monetary policy, based on inaccurate data, combined with some corruption for good measure.
If large buys of additional F-22s were made, it wouldn’t be unrealistic to see $100-110M/airframe pricing.
u have to maintain that so called poor economic & monetary policy to maintain growth & create jobs. otherwise it is complete collapsed. for example
Russians can still create economic growth (among the fastest) with 12% interest rate and 60% stock market decline but US cannot go beyond 5% interest rate. This is the result of previous cold war.
So there is no choice without massive printing of dollars on continous basis & keep interest rate low.
star49Why is Russia signing this deal in the first place?
To earn money and create dependency. They can afford to pick and chose business.
http://www.kyivpost.com/world/29852
Top U.S. officer pleads for cooperation with Moscow
While Mullen urged Moscow to respect a French-brokered peace pact and said U.S. ally Georgia deserved strong support, he argued that maintaining cooperation with Russia would benefit America
star49Wrong. Launch range was 228 km. Read the article. Plus it was a test environment, the radar may have been undergoing an evaluation as well. And this has been translated from Russian, they may have meant that they had begun tracking the target at 320 km. Either way they clearly state that the launch distance was 228 km.
Successufl destruction at 228km and it is put in bracket.. Lockon is the launch range. otherwise they will have given tracking information of target.
if 319,5 kilometers the launch of rocket R-33 (successfully destroyed target) was carried out at the distance 228 kilometers
Because you’re just making that up with absolutely no evidence whatsoever other than “missiles are fast” or something equally absurd.
When u read Vympel press release. larger missiles have 360 seconds burn time. they can intercept at much higher altitude and speeds. Radar/missile is designed for lock on missiles.
The aviation controlled air-to-air missile of the long range of action R -33[e] is intended for the interception of the aerial targets, including of the cruise missiles above different underlying surface, on all foreshortenings, at any time twenty-four hours, in the simple and adverse weather conditions, under the influence of natural and electronic jamming.
Rocket R -33[e] is the basic armament of aircraft-interceptor MiG-31[E].
Control system of rocket in the composition of complex MiG-31[E] provides the independent guidance of the missiles of those released from one either several interceptors on one or several purposes at the different heights with different flight speeds.
star49You’re not understanding the point. The missile was fired at a target which was 228 km away. Obviously the target was not stationary, so it would hit the target at a different range. But the launch range was 228 km.
lock on was achieved at 319.5 km and target was destroyed at 228km. u dont activate lockon 100km further than target. ur in search/tracking mode.
That does not mean that it can intercept AAMs or SAMs.
why it cant? larger radars and missiles have more sensitive seekers.
star49From some quick calculations – with a few lazy rounding errors – The optimal range that R-33 would have travelled assuming a head on engagement was 192ish kilometers – assuming the R-33 had a lofted trajectory with no loss in horizontal velocity – traveling at Mach 3.5 between 11 and 20 km up. That was making hugely favourable assumptions in favour of the missile – that won’t be the case in reality. In reality the missile probably didn’t travel a distance of over 160 km under its own power.
MIG was flying at Mach 2 towards the target at 8km height and target was at 10km height. when u launch missile from Mach 2 platform. It is naturally it will hit way before than its actual launch range. R-33 is way faster than Mach 3.5. Mach 3.5 is speed of R-27.
star49Russian fifth-generation fighter to perform maiden flight in 2009 – deputy minister
ST. PETERSBURG. Sept 24 (Interfax-AVN) – A Russian fifth-generation fighter will fly its maiden flight in 2009, Russian Deputy Industry and Trade Minister Yury Borisov told journalists at a conference in St. Petersburg on Tuesday.
The plane prototype already exists, and is based in Komsomolsk-on-Amur, Borisov said.
The aircraft will be equipped with Russian-made avionics, he said.
The principal contractor for building the fifth-generation fighter is the Sukhoi aircraft holding company. Most experts are of the view that the characteristics of the basic version of the Russian fifth-generation fighter will be competitive with those of its U.S. analogs.
The projected aircraft will be multifunctional (that is, capable of destroying both aerial and ground targets in any weather and at any time of day), super-maneuverable (capable of flying at low airspeeds and with a high angle of attack), hard to detect in the optical, infrared, and radar waves, and capable of using 300-400-meter-long runways to take off and land.
The aircraft will also be able to perform long flights at supersonic speeds with multiple aerial refueling, will have qualitatively new electronic equipment, and its flight processes will be automated as much as possible.
star49Yes, it was fired at a distance of 228 km. That is right there in the article. Why you aren’t getting this is beyond me.
Fired at 228Km? (It means the target was standing in air not moving at 189m/s)) which is offcourse not true. In both case head on and tail chase. Missiles are fired at far away distance than when it is hit. pretty simple
And the MiG-31 cannot shoot down SAMs or AAMs no matter what statements you fraudulently misinterpret to make it seem so. They’re talking about “antiaircraft missile systems”, meaning missile systems designed to shoot down aircraft. He differentiates these things from “aviation”, meaning that they are not airborne. That means some sort of surface to air system.
Ruaf has clearly stated that MIG-31 can shoot down stealthy targets and supersonic and hypersonic vehicles.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vympel_R-77
Gennadiy Sokolovski, General Designer of the Vympel Design Bureau, said that the R-77 missile can be used against medium and long range air-to-air missiles such as the AIM-120 AMRAAM and AIM-54 Phoenix, as well as SAMs such as the Patriot
star49Not necessarily true, but either way, the missile was still not fired at 300 km.
But it wasnt fired from 228km either. U can lockon fire it. and if target is head on it will still hit at much lesser range.
Read it again. They are saying that work on the Zaslon helped when they set up a shop in NIIP that develops phased arrays for both “aviation and for the antiaircraft missile systems”, implying SAM systems. What motive anyone would have to twist that around to fabricate ideas about MiG-31s shooting down AAMs or SAMs is beyond me.
Only SAMs/AAMs can go hypersonic untill now. So logically they are taking about those things. Not subsonic cruise missiles.
star49does anyone seriously belive that NASA can built next generation shuttle cheaper & on time than Klipper?
http://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/local/state/orl-nasa2408sep24,0,5172839.story
NASA clears hurdle on Soyuz
Griffin has told Congress that the shuttle is too expensive — and dangerous — to keep flying past 2010 and that he needs the waiver now because it takes the Russians three years to build new spacecraft. NASA officials already are negotiating with the Russians over terms of the deal
star49You can’t even read your own source right. It stated that the radar acquired the target at 319.5 km, with the missile launch being at 228 km.
It was lock on at 319.5km. Radar acquiring is detecting and tracking. that will be totally different values.
Antiaircraft = able to destroy aircraft. That has nothing to do with you making up claims that it can act as an antiMISSILE system, shooting down ARMs and AAMs.
antiaircraft missile systems . u conveniently forget the missile system wording. It is translation so not clear. but intending meaning is pretty obvious.
star49Wasn’t the AL-41F1 going to have 155 kN instead of 175 kN which was for the larger and heavier MiG MFI and Su-47? If not so provide an up to date source which confirms this!
PAK-FA specification has never been released but u can clearly assume that are designing completely new engine of 5+ generation. The whole article is in PAK-FA thread by saturn. There is no point in creating new engine for 155KN thrust..
AL-31FM-3 or higher thrust version of 117S can achieve.
http://www.airfleet.ru/index.php?staid=1001029
Next stages in the Salut AL-31F development program shall result in AL-31FM-2 and AL-31FM-3. Those models feature further improved design, enabling thrust increase to the range between 14000 and 15000 kgf. These models can be equipped with either non-deflectable or swivel nozzles (KliVT technologies).Upgrade into M-1, M-2 and M-3 standards is possible not only for standard (baseline) AL-31Fs powering twin-engined aircraft (of the Flanker series). But also for the recent variations of the baseline model, developed for single-engined aircraft. In particular, these can find application on the MiG-23 family, including MiG-23BN and MiG-27M still in service with India and other countries.
http://www.airfleet.ru/index.php?staid=1001062
NPO Saturn is working on a more advanced engine for the T-50. It is believed that the fighter’s production version would have two new-version AL-41F engines with thrust-to-weight ratio of 14-15. NPO Saturn also hopes that this new version of AL-41F will also power a would-be single-engine fighter design that is being considered by Russian fighter houses as a direct competitor to the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter.Vladimir Karnozov
I speak about operational capabilities and in that area the Su-27SM is NOTHING special in comparison to other operational fighters. National budget or not the development has been paid by the Chinese as the Su-27SMs avionics are widely based on the Su-30MKK. Money is money from where it comes doesn’t matter.
When it says that includes the best of MKI/MKK so dont assume it is based on MKK alone. No one has seen antenna of operational fighter.
star49The missile ranged 220 km, not 320 km. And I still think they are referring to part of the R-37 test series; the R-33S has been very closely guarded, far more so than the R-37, with no details ever having been released. Either way even if the SARH R-33S was the weapon employed the radar did not “lock on” at 320 km, the R-33S can receive midcourse updates and doesn’t need to be locked on prior to launch. The only reason your SARH weapon system has to lock on to the target at launch is if you have an inferior missile system requiring seeker lock on before launch.
Missile was lunched at 320km but hit at 228km. it means it was cooperative head on engagement.
You’re joking, right? Where do you pull this stuff out of?
What is meant by antiaircraft?
star49I have no problem with that. I just have a problem with you troll presenting every fart, be it yet so small as upper magic for your beloved russian warplanes. I’m personally very interested in Russian AC as well at least the MiG-29 and Su-27 family, but my interest is not just limited to those aircraft and while others stick with facts and maintain at least a bit objectivness (though not every one) you are clearly a completely biased boy with a great not to say huge fantasy about Russian wonder weapons, which are nothing special in reality.
It is clearly special to create such low cost upgrade with increase thrust and engine life and still can be applied to exiting aircraft without modification and that without taking single dollar from national budget. All through export contracts. When Russia do invest there own money. Expect to see 18 to 20 ton engine for PAK-FA with 15 to 1 TWR.
star49F/A-18 unstable twin engined FBW fighter with FULL digital FBW unlike the Su-27.
That F-18C is no match of without FBW MIG-29 let alone Su-27
AMRAAM was already supported by all F-15s, F-16s and F/A-18 from the late 90s. Which OPERATIONAL Russian design was able to use it? 16 MiG-29S from 1994 wow. The Su-27 had no MFDs at, its radar was by no means impressive and it lacked any sufficient multirole capabilities. The Su-27SM just introduces upgrades similar to what has been available to western fighters since the late 80s, except a few specific things. There is NOTHING special on the Su-27SM at all and it is hardly compareable to any 5th gen design, by NO MEANS.
U said 10 years. Late 90s is not 10 years. There is that 400 MIG-31 that has every thing for BVR. Su-27SM is more multirole upgrade. Russian does not need to reveal about 5th generation qualities which are not available for export.
N-001 has a tracking range of 100 km against a fighter sized target and it is still used on the Su-27SM…. Wow. MiG-29 has a range of just 1500 km despite being even larger than the EF. You compare apples with oranges.Your point is you have no point just being a fan boy who has a huge fantasy and spams it around as given fact.
MIG-29 of 1983 and price of $3m has range of 1500km not MIG-29K of 2008.
early 90s F-15/F-16 hardly has more range than Su-27 of those times. If Russians produce $100m MIG-29 just like EF price . It will be flying in Space. u will need space suits to operate it.Practically unlimited upgrade potential. u cannot compare limited fighter EF with MIG-29. Thats Why MIG-29 got AESA/TVC twin IRST but not EF.
Sign In
