star49I think nobody disagrees that the obscene amounts spent on aircraft do not compare with the reality of war, where peoples lives are wasted (American but also Iraqi and Afghani by much higher numbers) due to shortcomings that could have been addressed with a fraction of that money.
But if we widen our view like that, we can question the need for an air force at all.
What I wanted to point out is that the RuAF has clear and imminent shortcomings, and these are not the open flank in northern Siberia (which was indeed a major shortcoming until the mid 80ies). It suffered more losses in a 5 day campaign versus Georgia than NATO did in a 5 week campaign versus Serbia. To project power on its direct neighbors (and that is what Dear Leader Putin wants to do), he needs armed forces that can effectively do such conflicts. If Georgia was equipped with anything close to a real air defense (like latest Hawk versions, not talking of Patriot), its air space would have been effectively denied to RuAF.
Armchair generals like echonine and manson_322 would then sent the mighty MiG-31 to patrol the air space above 40kft (lower altitudes wouldn’t be a good idea) and keep it free of F-22.
So before I update MiG-31s, I rather fit latest ECM gear into Suchoi 25 and replace the crappy Suchoi 24 with more recent types.
Ruaf suffer some losses because it sent 1970s era fighters to battlefield & fought a low cost war. They aretn stupid to borrow money and fight multibillion wars against insignificant targets. they have eyes on big picture. for Hawk/Patroit they will simply bombard the place with Iskander/Smerch missiles and missiles from long range bombers. MIG-31/Su-27/A-50 duty is to protect those assets. They exactly know how to fight low cost wars.
star49While the Pentagon actually learned that and cut the Raptor at approx. 200 units. Procuring less would be industrially stupid. The funds are obviously put on the F-35. Additionally, the USAF keeps their aircraft constantly modernized in numbers (not something like four upgraded aircraft a year like this SMT stuff).
The MiG-31 is already procured and paid for, there is no industrial base it keeps alive. The future of Russian military aviation is the Suchoi 27 and derivatives until a new fighter is developed.
The MiG-31 – despite being a very useful aircraft and deadly adversary for incoming bombers in the 80ies – is today of no use but remains a high maintenance aircraft.
MIG-31 is today of very high use. It gives Kinematic range to missiles which no other fighter can do it. It has thrust/range and radar power to detect and lock on stealth targets. How much is the IR signature of modern crusie missile. Way smaller than any non-afterburning fighter engine. MIG-31 share engine with transport fleet. So no need for separate industrial infrastructure is required. http://www.avid.ru. It can be flown from rough fields. So it can quickly be deployed to other countries just like IL-76. No high Gs are required on airframe.So airframe are in perfect condition for long life (no breaking up like F-15) nor there is composite materials in airframe. so repair is cheap and easy.
It is the enhancement in Radar and missile seeker/propulsion capabilities that made MIG-31 rival for 5th generation. upgrade is way cheaper due to engine and radar commonality. And with new long range missiles now for Sukhoit fighters. Even that will become common. MIG-31 advantage in Radar size/high altitude/high speed will still remains.
It is the projects like EF/A-380 that has made companies like EADS bankrupt.
When u read PAK-FA official news. They say replacement for MIG-29/Su-27 but not of MIG-31.
United Aircraft to resume building updated MiG-31
NIZHNY NOVGOROD. June 4 (Interfax) – United Aircraft Corporation (UAC) is considering reviving production of a modernized version of the MiG-31 fighter, UAC president and CEO Alexei Fyodorov said Friday.
The program to modernize the MiG-31 is “gaining momentum,” Fyodorov said at the annual meeting of the Sokol (RTS: NASO) aircraft plant in Nizhny Novgorod.
Sokol general director Mikhail Shibayev said the plant has received a big order under a four-year contract and the contract is expected to be extended by three to five years.
“The plant is completely ready for serial modernization of the planes with complete overhaul,” Shibayev said, recalling that previously overhauls were carried out by Defense Ministry repair plants rather than by the aircraft makers.
Fyodorov also said that development of the MiG-35 has begun and it should be on the market in 2009-2010. This plane is to be built at Sokol.
It was reported earlier that Russia would offer the MiG-35 fighter at an Indian tender.
Shibayev also said that, under contracts with the MiG Aircraft Corporation, the plant is making frame components and other parts for MiG-29K (KUB) jets. In addition, the plant has begun working on serial production of air intakes and at the start of 2007 shipped the first set for assembly of MiG-29Ks to MiG Aircraft.
Last December, the plant delivered the first batch of modernized MiG-29UB under a contract with MiG.
Also last year, the plant completed delivery of parts for the modernization of 125 MiG-21BIS for the Indian air force, Shibayev said
http://www.royfc.com/news/mar/0703mar10.html
MiG-31 Interceptor to Remain in Air Force Combat Ranks – Air Force CinCCommander-in-chief of the Russian air force, General-Colonel Vladimir Mikhaylov has reported that the MiG-31 long-range interceptor will remain in air force combat ranks, will be upgraded and will be rearmed.
“The MiG-31 interceptor will remain in the ranks of the active elements,” he declared on Friday to Interfax-AVN.
V. Mikhaylov reported that “at the present time upgrade of the MiG-31 is underway along the way of expanding its combat capabilities.” “The interceptor will be equipped with the newest examples of missile armament,” the CinC noted
star49Twice as effective does not mean twice the range. It can mean increased kill probability, it can mean twice as many simultaneous engagements, etc.
When Russians talk about Radars what is the first thing they mention. What is Irbis famous for?
Ok. That statement is totally false. Picture a 91N6 radar set mounted on a 30 meter mast assembly. The radar horizon 1000 km downrange is 190,000 feet. That means that at a distance of 1000 km, assuming the radar can get a strong enough return to locate a target to begin with, anything below 190,000 feet cannot be seen by the radar due to the curvature of the Earth.
Now you tell me. What AWACS is operating at or above 190,000 feet?
The statement is only false whan u take it literally. When they say more than for than 300KM for 1sqm for S-300P can translate into 0.001 Sqm against target for 300KM range for S-400. thats what 2 to 4 times effectiveness means. Not that 100 track vs 400 track which is much simpler upgrade.
star49Ok thanks for your assumptions. 600 km is the maximum range its computers will process signal returns. As I said I was being optimistic for the system when I mentioned it being a 5m2 target. R+D for S-400 started in the 80s. People here including myself don’t follow your logic if I can call it that – where you ignore physics – such as radar horizon, earths curvature, propulsion technology etc and just double your ranges or triple them – because they are Russian and slightly newer increments of the older systems they are based on.
This Russians way of doing things. constant improvement of existing stuff. About S-400 they mentioned it is two to 4 times more effective. So if S-300P is alteast 300KM. So there shouldnt be any surprize with 600 to 1200km for S-400.
Anyway – you still haven’t explained how the Russian systems are going to cope with JDRADMs 1200 km range – please explain :).
JDRADMs does not have range of 1200km nor there is any recent tests of 200km range AAM in US and there arent many platforms for using it. I highly doubt F-16/F-15 are going to be upgraded. and JSF is a decade away from operational experiance. Russians have introduced new simultors for MIG-31 and have now 3 decades of experiance in terms of pilot training and tactics with this aircraft. they can use it to its optimum potential.
star49Not free, any more than the other ex-Soviet republics got their equipment free. They’d contributed to the Soviet economy which had built, & paid for, that equipment.
Some republics did better than others, because they had more bases on their territory, & the Baltic States were robbed, because the bases there were stripped by the departing Russian (ex-Soviet) forces. But without the non-existent balance sheet for the USSR & its military spending, which shows which republics were subsidised, by how much, & by which other republics, you can’t say how much & by who the gains & losses were.
By now every thing should be pretty obvious who subsidized who?
It has been 18 years since Soviet Union.
14 republics didnot contribute as much as Russians contributed. And that includes Russian living in republics. There are still 10 to 15 million people working from Central Asia working in Russia from Agriculture to construction and that gives Russia enormous influence if it chose to exert on those countries not mention well established Russian train and pipeline network.
Ukraine and Belrus will be the worst. They are facing demographic collapse.
There per capita income is one third with completely under debt with higher taxes , negative trade deficits compared to Russia. And they arent spending money on Space/Nuke/Strategic weopons nor there conventional forces are exercising on large scale. they cant review there industries becasue they dont have the market power of forcing multiationals to create joint ventures under local leadership. thats what Russia doing and China already did.
Another example is Eastern EU. Western EU has subsidized it for past 15 years. thats why Western EU is has become bankrupt and cannot standup to Russia. Therefore in 21st century alliances cost more money than fighting stand alone as efficient force. There are other differences that makes alliances lead to collective bankruptcies.
star49Maybe you could explain how being able to understand Russian would make this statement less retarded?
“By virtue of size alone the new Sukhoi jet will be superior in terms of performance and capability.”
(This should be good 😉 )
http://www.mnweekly.ru/interview/20080911/55345891.html
Inside the cockpit with Sergei Melnikov
MN – So, what makes this particular aircraft so special?
SM – The Su-27 is a very maneuverable aircraft, making it perfect for dogfights. I remember when it was first demonstrated some time ago, one American pilot made a comment which has become a sort of a slogan for us.
He said, “If you encounter a SU-27 in a dogfight the only thing you can do is eject.” This was said about the first generation SU-27 and now we are producing new generation aircraft with vectoring engine nozzles – they are even more manageable. These aircraft are a real breakthrough and there is nothing else like this in Russia and abroad.
star49I’d love to see star49’s source on 600 km dectection of 1m2 targets – I don’t want anymore silly assumptions either.
I have clearly given u the ranges of S-300P from designer. and it is 20 year old system. ur clearly assuming 600km for 5 sqm u can clearly see that BARS has only range of 140km (which is not true based on RMAF evaluation from 2001). And u can see the same with Beriev ranges. It is far off from real world. Website is just information purpose. it is the interveiw that give correct ranges. A-50eh can pick cruise missile at 500km & that is 10 year old figure. not the A-50M that currently flying.
http://www.beriev.com/eng/core_e.html
* – performance can be changed at customer request
star49That in some cases is true. But how many times does one need to do it, before it becomes more expensive than an engine that lasts longer. 🙂 If we take the Mig-23 as an example it becomes ludicrus how many engines they go through in their life time. Thats if I remember the figures correctly.
I dont know how to translate price 30 years into current prices. But in current prices the entire IAF MIG-29 order for 66 aircraft is around $15m. Even if u make it 4 times. it would be still be $60M. So it is $1m a piece for MIG-29. MIG-23 is even cheaper. combination of low wages and free resource supply created that distortion. latest MIGs/Sukhoi has alteast half life of Western engines. I havent seen any Flanker crashes in export countries.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/india/baaz.htm
An agreement was signed in October 1982 with the manufacturers for the supply of aircraft including trainers, and option for licence manufacture in India at a cost of Rs 621.75 crores at 1981 price level plus escalation. The option was surrendered in June 1984 in favour of induction of another advanced technology aircraft. An additional agreement was entered into with the manufacturer in March 1986 for the procurement of aircraft in flyaway condition to be supplied by September 1988 at a cost of Rs 107.74 crores plus escalation for sustaining the unit establishment (UE) till the turn of the century.
star49There won’t be one, but of course it’s a reasonable assumption since just a few years ago they could see targets at shorter ranges.:cool:
Everything is based on assumption. What do u think how old is S-300P radar?
Vremya Novosti, September 06, 2006
GENERAL DESIGNER OF THE ALL-RUSSIAN INSTITUTE OF RADIO TECHNOLOGY YURY KUZNETSOV ON SITUATION IN MILITARY RADIOLOCATION
Question: Given such requirements to radars you probably need a good element base. Is it domestic or foreign?Kuznetsov: We try to make everything related to the super high frequency equipment that forms a signal on the domestic element base. So far, it is satisfactory. In elements of computer equipment that are developing rapidly we lag behind seriously and hence we use foreign components. Simultaneously either counterparts of foreign products or original products are developed in Russia. At any rate, purchase of a foreign element base for the entire life cycle of our radars is allowed sometimes.
According to separate components of radars (array, receiver, transmitter) we cannot compete against the West yet but according to complex technical solutions Russia is on a very good level and sometimes even outruns the West. For example, despite big weight a radar for S-300P is deployed after a march in five minutes and is folded in the same time. It detects a target having reflecting surface of only 1 square meter at a distance exceeding 300 kilometers. There is nothing like this in the West. It is possible to say approximately the same about Kasta. The West underestimates such characteristic of radars as mobility. Our radars are more survivable and are on a good level according to technical characteristics, which is why they are bought. They are bought not only by those to whom nothing else is given. For example, Greece bought both Kasta and air defense missile system Tor. Well-known designer Veniamin Yefremov told me how they tested Tor: Americans arranged jammin! g and electronic countermeasures but detection radar of Tor performed perfectly well
360 sec burn time. It is almost 4 times of current medium range missile. Add to that the speed of heavier missile and altitude. u get 8 times range figures. The point is to make it small enough for internal carrige.
For the airplane of the fifth generation Vimpel is developing ! new “item 810” on its base complying with requirements of placement in internal compartments of the carrier.
Among the new technological solutions implemented during development of this missile is use of the solid-fuel jet engine with a two-impulse thrust program and regulated pause, as well as use of the energy unit with duration of work increased to 360 seconds. Along with optimization of the aerodynamic configuration this allows achievement of big launch ranges in all altitudes including the small ones, as well as the maximum altitude for killing high-speed target reaching 40 kilometers
2000km range for A-50
http://www.royfc.com/news/aug/2405aug01.html
Ivanov reported that a Russian A-50 long-range radar observation airplane (the counterpart of the American AWACS), which is able “to see” the whole region of the exercises, has been activated in the exercises. “Any airplane within a radius of 2,000 kilometers from the epicenter of the exercises, naturally, will be seen on its screens,” the minister noted.
Source: 24.08.05, RIA Novosti
4 semi-active missile at ranges greater than 300Km. and target detection range is no less than 350-400KM. so it can 500km or any number depending upon height above 10km. 600KM is very reasonable for MIG-31 considering difference weith Flanker.
Irbis-E can detect and simultaneously track up to 30 air targets with preservation of uninterrupted observation of the airspace (passing-by tracking mode), can attack two targets with two missiles with semi-active self-homing heads and up to eight targets with eight missiles with active self-homing heads simultaneously including up to four targets at distances exceeding 300 kilometers. In the air-to-surface mode the radar provides for map making of ground and water surfaces and detection of ground targets in the modes of observation with real beam (low resolution), with Doppler beam narrowing (medium resolution) and observation with adapted focused synthesis of the aperture (high and super high resolution modes).
The range of detection of air targets with effective reflecting surface of 3 square meters amounts for Irbis-E to not less than 350-400 kilometers for counter courses and to not less than 150 kilometers for pursuit courses (when target altitude is 10 kilometers and more).
so every thing is now assumptions.
star49Officially at least :). Many “experts” currently estimate the F119 has a thrust rating of in the 35 000lb – 40 000lb range.
While the F119 are due to get incremental thrust improvements on their current thrust settings that will probably come to fruition before the PAK-FA.
Not to mention that in war time settings it is possible to get significantly improved performance at the cost of engine life. Western engines generally have longer engine life and therefore perhaps a bit more to play with in terms of thrust.
Western engines are also overprice. EJ-200 is more about $10m a engine. Russian engine u can replace the whole engine at much lower cost and time saving than overhauling Western engine.
star49The only military radars in Russia with a range of 1000km are on the ground, are made of concrete, are very large and track stuff in space!!! They are not fitted to supersonic fighters.
S-400 radar is 1 sqm at 600km. should not be a problem AWACS at 1000km.
Fighter looks from high altitude. 300KM range with R-37 was not achieved at high altitude. MIG-31 has the speed and altitude to make missile fire upto 600km. If there isnt changes in past 20 years so how come all Strike weopons range have nearly doubled in past 15 years.
star49China is developing the XXJ as their native 5th generation fighter design. They have no need for Russia’s PAK-FA. They may import some of the systems, but there is no need for the entire aircraft. It’ll be interesting to see which jet is in service first.
China is also developing A-320 competitor and is also developing IL-76 class transport and is also developing reginoal competitor to Embrarer but 5th generation complexity is at different level. It is not J-10 that u can implant.
There is no guarantee that any PAK-FA will ever end up in Syria. I doubt it will happen due to the fact that NATO or Israel would love to get their hands on one. And Russia will not be “closing the black sea from Outside”. That’d be interfering with Turkish territorial waters and a NATO member state. If you think Medvedev and Putin are stupid enough to actually directly harass NATO in such a manner when there are far more amusing ways to get what they want, then you need to rethink it.
There is 100% guarantee that PAK-FA along with S-400/S-500 will end up in Syria if Russian Naval port comes online. to be men by Russians themselves. They have found that u can blockade entire Black sea nations and bring them into negotiation table. It is more advance version of pipeline/trade route politics.
http://www.hurriyet.com.tr/english/finance/9814444.asp?scr=1
Look harder. Use that univ Lexis Nexis connection to its limits. FYI – this is an Indian precondition.
I dont there is such preconditions Russia signs. They can just create some different version just like Su-35 is to Su-30MK.
I didnt even try to make sense of what you wrote!! Lucky me!!
Irak isnt building pipelines to jordon/Kuwait. Its economic system is controlled by Iran just like its Parliment.
star49This upsets me then star49 – for you that is. Since one can’t find knowledge about the Su-35 from books or written word – that means you yourself know nothing about the Su-35, unless you designed it or fly it?
It also defies physics so I cant apply the basic fundamental laws to it either?
I know nothing but i follow Sukhoi Statments about various projects pretty deligently. Where in earth u can built a plane that just weigh 15.5 tons but has 11.5 tons internal fuel and is built with extensive titanium not with carbon composites like PAK-FA and still can withstand supermanevourability and enough weopons stations stressed for 5 long range missile strike.
u simply cannot compare Sukhoi with any other firm interms of aerodynamics and material use. They didnot had supercomputers and precision machines back in 70s when Flanker started. Now Knaapo has supercomputers and has much better finances. the rest of firms are pretty much in hopeless situation. The main problem is engine and electronics parts stuffed inside the aircraft for 5th generation fighter.
star49Stealth has nothing to do with it!!! Mig 31 does not have a small RCS. AN/APY-1 Radar in the E-3 has twice the power at least than the radar in the Mig 31 (more likely more, as the figures on Wiki, seem to be a bit low compared to what I was told when I flew in one), plus a much bigger antenna which focuses the power into a tighter beam and allows much more reflected energy to be picked up than the dinky antenna on the Mig 31. Plus of course you have this foolish idea that the E-3 is a fighter!!!!! Its not, but what it will have is a lot of friends about to do the fighting for it…in the air and on the ground. 500km range AAM’s for god sake. Well at the end of that 500km flight, the E-3 will somewhere else in the sky a long way away, low down and throwing out countermeasures while hiding behind it’s friendly fighter, SAM and EW cover, while your Mig 31 will be running from the E-3’s friends, that’s of course barring the fact that an ARMAAM or lPAC 3 type SAM hasn’t already killed it, because at the start of any operation the E-3 will be way back behind any boarder well behind its SAM and Fighter cover.
MIG-31 also works in group action mode. Couple of BVR missiles for shooting at E-3 and next couple at destroying incoming fighters & AAMs/SAMs. 500KM AAM is not some odd thing when lauch platform has speed & altitude. 300Km has already been demonstrated 15 years ago and that was agianst much smaller target and far lower altitude of launch platform. thats why they are so confident of LRAAM for Flanker now. and there is Project 810 for ultra longe BVR. (almost 3 times of R-37M). so if they could not do 500 to 600KM BVR they wouldnt be attemptiing of building 900KM BVR missile for PAK-FA.
If E-3 is far away than it has no influence over battlfied. So it will not see the battle picture while MIG-31 can go in & out from radar survellence zone much faster. MIG-31 trains with S-300/A-50. it knows how deal with it.
star49Lol star49 you are clueless about aerodyanmics – go read a book or study because you seem to love some aircraft so much – you talk rubbish and look stupid. If anything using TVC at supersonic speeds to massively increase alpha is going to bleed your energy state down quicker than anything. Mabye if you want a rapid turn that leaves you flying at 350 km/h you’d use it.
do u think u can find knowledge about Su-35 from Books? Even practical training will not give in another firm the knowledge what Sukhoi has acculmulated.
http://forum.keypublishing.co.uk/showthread.php?t=81155&page=16
“No universities will give the knowledge, which can be obtained in practice, in “the dry”.
Sign In
