Its hard to say if the Su-27SM specs are based upgrading the SK airframe and not upgrade from the old -S. SM and SMK are often used interchangeably in marketing literature. The payload weight cannot be taken seriously because this is best case basis of marketing, using the SK as the upgrade basis.

It is only Russian upgrade SM. Nothing to do with 90s. Payload is correct. Range and speed is also more. It seems lighter avionics have done the work.

Sez who? Fans again?

It is right there in MIG press releases. MIG SMT orders speak for its capability despite high price.

Show me actual factory documentation of the claims you mention.

China has many 20 plus year old airframes of MiG-21F design. Just how many East Block MiG-21Fs actually last that long? For that matter, how many Eastern Block MiG-17s and MiG-19s actually last for over 3 decades? PAF F-6s first received in the sixties and early seventies were only retired this decade. How many MiG-19s actually last that long? In China, many MiG-15 and MiG-17 based trainers are still operational and flying with flight academies. While well maintained, they are certainly not pampered being training aircraft they put a lot of flight hours per year far more than your collector warbirds.

what next? A chinese made bicycle last 30 years so it is some engineering feat. MIG-19 like cheap Antonov clones have limited Scientific/Engineering skills behind it and and have very limited usefullness. U simply cannot compare them to IL-76/Flanker upgrades. J-6 will spend most of its time in mechanic workshop because of limited engine time. No external load to speak off. Russian Science is universally credible. Confirmed by customer and partners in various spheres.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/05/29/214251/competition-mounts-to-power-ssj.html
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/06/05/214423/turbomeca-boss-slams-russian-bureaucracy.html

You last comment is the foolish one,Sukhoi can not do anything, that is the most foolish one because number one the J-11 is not Chinese, not even with a WS-10 or Chinese built radar, it is a Su-27, the aircraft is Russian, it is Russian property as a design, this is when i can see you can not understand logic, China signed an agreement, that is a reality only built 105 because they did not want to pay for the rest 90 Su-27s, saying because the chinese build the airframe (when there is no proof they built the entire airframe by them selves) means they can built SU-27s, this means the Chinese are stealing, a license break, and believe me Russia has more than one way of pressing China, Russia simply can stop other projects, reducing Chinese and Russian economic links in fact Russia has more nuclear weapons so china can not bully them and enough chemical and biological weapons that China won`t be able to beat Russia, however these nations won`t go to war but simply they will break economic ties and that will be more serious than you think because the Russians still are wealthier than Chinese and many Chinese want to go to Russia and immigrate and the Chinese companies only have Russia and Israel as source of technology transfers for advacned weapons, however in reality Russai will be affected too so both nations have nothing to win by breaking economic relations or waging war against each other.
[/qoute]
wow, now, you are getting really desperate. I never mentionned anywhere that J-11B was a Chinese design, did I? But the upcoming J-11BS with more changes will be though. As for this stopping other projects, go ahead. It seems China is the one that is stopping military purchase talks with Russians right now. You got the IL-76 deal on us, what else do you have? Russia is not stupid enough to go nuclear against China over J-11B, so stop blabbering. As for this breaking economic relations hurting China, how? Russia is China’s 8th largest trading partner. While China is Russia’s 4th. You have a trading surplus on us. You think we are worried about you breaking economic relationship? The only ones that China fear are EU and USA.

you guys are already breaking on the IL-76 agreement. What more leverage do you have? If you don’t want to sell su-33, don’t sell it. It’s just a matter of time before China develops a naval variant of flanker or J-10. And since their carriers are not going to be ready for a while, it’s not that big of a problem. What, sukhoi is not going to sell us su-34, 35? We don’t want it anyway.

Again, you still have yet to answer my one question.

And you still have not fully explained your view point on how you think the situation is.

China and indigenous development? U built J-10/J-11/FC-1 with external help and even ARJ-21 is taking untill 2011 with all the exteranal components and Ukranina super critical wing. u simply cannot do deep modification without exteranal help thats why J-11 exactly look like Su-27SK and twin seater case will be the same.
and it is not about 4 and 8 the largest trading partner. Russia consumer are used to high inflation and high interest rates.
It is the West that needs cheaper Chinese products because of massive consumer debt and low savings. Inflation is main threat.

Really? Because MiG-25 had short time on high supersonic speeds, and it’s missiles were comparable in range with AIM-7, yet more heavier (big warhead), suited for interception role.

Now this thing can detect F-15 well, well before the F-15 will get a chance to fire on it. It can use it’s speed, and height, to outrun anything. And by the way, if it managed to launch an AGM or ASM, the mission is over…there’s no point in chasing the Foxhound.

MiG-31 can fly 40 minutes on Mach 2.35. What’s the range of AIM-120C, when the target is running away at M2.35, tail-on aspect, and has more altitude? 10 km?

MiG-31 will never get that close.

By the way, it can engage 4 targets at once. R-33’s might not be the best option to shoot down fighters, but keep in mind; they are SARH missiles, the hound does not have the courtesy to disengage before the target was hit or missed, but SARH’s have one very nice advantage over ARH’s…the enemies EW systems don’t have a clue where the hell it’s coming from. They only sense the position of the illuminating platform, but missile won’t have the same trajectory.

Engage each F-15 with two R-33’s, and they will go defensive. I would go, that’s for sure, if my TEWS rang two launches, and i don’t know the missile’s whereabouts. Thus, each MiG-31 can effectively scare (or even hit) two enemy fighters, give itself enough time to pump up the burners and run for the ground based target. After dealing with two Amoses, Eagle would have no time to chase two and half times supersonic aircraft, let alone engage it. After A2G based launch, MiG’s could evade the same patrol by using a widened route, again at high supersonic speeds. Once it achieved enough distance, and once it came close to protected airspace, it can drop to M0.8 and safely land.

Foxhound can go 1500 km’s at Mach 2.35, and 3300 km’s at Mach 0.8. Combine those two numbers, and you could get a mission radius of over 1000 km. Simply because there’s no need to push it into supersonic cruise, until you came out of protected airspace. That counts for returning home, also.

MiG-31 is simply uncatchable for the time being. And it has big radar and big missiles. Those missiles might not have excellent PK against agile fighters, but any sane pilot wouldn’t just run into them. Especially when he doesn’t know where are they coming from.

Kinematic range of R-33S should be around 150km. That’s well above AIM-120C-5. MiG flies higher and faster. It would get the first shot against any American 4th gen fighter.

Keep in mind, this talk refers to my hypothesis of Iran purchasing something in range of MiG-31BS with A2G capabilities. That might not happen at all, but i was reffering that variant would be two times more capable for them, than MiG-31E.

IMHO, the only thing that’s currently better in BVR than MiG-31BM, is the F-22. Altrough that clash would still have grounds for big discussion.

Its not necessary a down grade for export. they may just not execute or advertize the contract. there are alot of promising customers for that plane.
and Cruise missiles are very slow to reach targets. takes hrs. if MIG-31 can detect them on time. It can give plenty of time for ground forces to move on or possibly shoot down with guns.

http://www.royfc.com/cgi-bin/today/acft_news.cgi
Sokol May Begin Production of New MiG-31 Airplanes

OAO Nizhniy Novgorod Sokol Aviation Plant (Nizhniy Novgorod is included in OAO Unified Aircraft Building Corporation, OAK) may start production of new MiG-31 airplanes in parallel with carrying out upgrade of aircraft which are in the Russian Federation air force inventory, the OAK president and chairman of the Nizhniy Novgorod board of directors, Aleksey Fedorov, reported at the annual Sokol meeting.

According to the Sokol general director, Mikhail Shibaev, right now the plant is ready for the series upgrade of these airplanes with the simultaneous execution of major overhaul. Earlier, Russian Federation defense ministry aircraft repair plants were involved with the major overhaul of the fighters.

A. Fedorov added that right now FGUP RSK MiG has export contracts for MiG-31 upgrade.

M. Shibaev noted that the upgrade of such airplanes is being undertaken at the aircraft plant within the framework of a 4-year contract with the Russian Federation defense ministry. According to the contract with FGUP RSK MiG, in 2006, Sokol completed the upgrade of an experimental batch of MiG-31B airplanes into the MiG-31BM variant and transferred them for state tests.

Preparations for the upgrade and overhaul of the airplanes has taken place at Sokol since 2006 and was completed this year. “This work will be continued over the next 3 – 5 years,” M. Shibaev added.

The MiG-31 is a long-range supersonic fighter interceptor and the first Russian fourth generation combat airplane. Created 25 years ago, it even today is the fastest and highest combat airplane in the world. Until recently, the MiG-31 was the only series-built fighter in the world equipped with phased antenna array aircraft radar. Along with the American deck-based F-14, it is a long-range air-to-air missile carrier. The MiG-31 is practically the only airplane which is able to intercept and destroy cruise missiles which are flying at extremely low altitudes.

The first preproduction batch of two MiG-31 airplanes was assembled at the Sokol aircraft plant in the summer of 1977. In 1985 – 1986, new versions of the airplane appeared – the MiG-31M interceptor and the anti-satellite MiG-31D, and in 1998 – the multirole MiG-31BM.

The MiG-31 which reached the inventory became a worthy rival to the American SR-71A reconnaissance airplane in the Far East and Polar region. According to the Test Pilots ((in English)) site, there are now more than 350 MiG-31 fighter interceptors in Russia’s air defense inventory. There are several doze MIG-31 in Kazakhstan’s air force.

Source: 04.06.2007, Agentstvo Biznes Monitoringa

hmmm. your just pulling this one out of your ass. These MIG-29A are only scarsely flown. Airframe life is limited to fatigue. Operating over the designed life of airframe and you start gambling with the lives of pilots. Only idiots would suggest this. Extension to airframe life will always involve major rework of the body as all microfractures must be found and fixed. MIG-29SMT and Su-27SM upgrades are not exampt form this which is why they are applied to newer airframes.

MIG-29SMT and Su-27SM applied to newr airframes? Just look at IAF/Ruaf they are more than 20 years old now. and they are increasing MTOW and Ground attack capability substantially with extended service life. Even in Eastern EU they are still flying the old ones. there is no evidence of crashes due to airframe or engine.

.

If I take a plane with a 4000 flight hour life and extend it to 6000 flight hours. You probably can do that with modifications on the same airframe design. If I take an airframe with 2000 flight hour life and move that to 6000 flight hours, there is going to be a lot more serious improvements underneath. Up to 8000 hours, really even more serious changes. There should be a threshold or a boundary where you simply cannot take the original airframe past this line and still call it mostly original.

From 2000 flight hours to 10,000 flight hours? That is a lot of changes (5X) and I mean calling it changes would be a euphemism.

You need to find an example where there is a comparable caliber or value in changes.

Export MIG-29A from 80s had 2500hr life and they are still flying without major upgrade. Similar is MIG-29SMT and Su-27SM upgrade with further ground attack ability and extending life by 20 to 25 years. For simple Air to Air mission 10,000 life is not a big deal for new built aircraft in 2007.

I doubt India would get EJ-200/F414 license with TOT at reasonable price. the better start flight testing Gripen with future variants of RD-33 for which India got license. and Gripen is not same class of Tejas. it is already capable of 5.3 tons and future variant make it as capable as F-16/M2K based on weopon stations, internal fuel with more advance aerodynamic design.
F-18/EF/Rafale does not have that much operational load/range advantage over Gripen/F-16 to justify cost of twin engine fighter.

lol, you still don’t get it do you? J-11B by definition means all indigenous. If it’s not all indigenous, it can only be considered an interim class. Russians don’t know facts on Chinese side, they only know facts on their own side. Which means they would know whether they partcipated in J-11B or not, but they wouldn’t know exactly what’s going on J-11B.

how russian does not know the facts with all that intelligence network. they can see this thing from space for any illegal aircraft just like they saw Tor-1 samples standing in US desert.

http://www.royfc.com/news/apr/0406apr01.html
China has request we help in erecting an aircraft factory. We have issued all the documentation for rigging and equipping according to an inexpensive and the best scenario. So: the Chinese always have selected the most modern solutions. They have not regretted the moneys for new technologies. They built a brilliant plant under our license. Today a similar deal is being discussed with India. Su-30MKI fighters will be produced there.

AL-31 reliable? lol, we have to keep on making 180 engine orders like this just to replace those unreliable engines we get from Russia.
China is not building J-11 like pancakes, less than 20 a year is nothing.

how do u know these are replacement? they shipped only 20 in a year. It does not look replacement. and Just look at Car industry. If Swedes/Italians/SK has the same domestic volume like Chinese there Car prices would be much lower and technology much higher.

That’s exactly why they’ve tested it out at CFTE for so long. If there is no structural changes needed to accommodate it, why would they have produced that many prototypes and tested it out for so long?

Timing of tests does not make it different. Flanker is very complex airframe smallest change in weights/weopons require two to three years of tests for Russians. i imagine it will be six years for Chinese alteast.

Russian pages are wrong. As seen in the recent JDW article, the change is far than just a modified Russian kit.

It looks exactly like 80s era Flanker. Just avionics change u can save 1000 kg weight and Chinese havent shown any incrase in payload or more weopon stations.

How can they have information if they are not involved in the process?

and how can they have information on all western weopons capability and quantity when they are not involved in the process.

so what? we all know about the orders. Those 180 are for replacing the AL-31s on the Russian flankers we previously purchased.

it is yet to be proven but judging from slow deliveries it looks for new build aircraft. China hasnt shown any capability they can make even 15 aircraft per year without kits and foreign engines.

Man, even based on your data which is not complete in the 1st place, then let we see:

1st 3 years 7/years: J11 was 1st assembled in 1998, so 1998/1999/2000 ,there are 7X3=21 units

2001? Your data not cover.

2002: 15 units

2003-2004: your data not cover

2005: 17 units as your data.

2006? Your data not cover.

If we take 2001’s output something in between 7 -15, say 10, and rest years without data cover as 15 ( at low end)

Then the total: 3 X7 + 10 + 15 + 15X3 + 17 =108 more than the 105 kits delivered.

Your data even against you.

It says average of 15 units since 2002. so u get 15*5=75 and add 21 units of 1999/2000/2001. so u got 96 units. I doubt there would be any in 1998. It is just for a few.
that 17 in 2006 are part of Average number 15.