ChromDo planes still dogfight?
I have read people comparing the manouverability of the MiG 29OVT with the F16, Gripen, Rafale, F22 and F35 but does it really matter or will they have shot each other down using AAMs from 25+ miles away?
Every modern plane carry ECM suite for a good reason. Remember that.
ChromReally?! In that days MiG could sell new built examples only and not AF examples, which were stored later. When in 1992 all productions did stop, what to sell at all?! In the end the same result for different reasons. All possible customers were unwilling to invest their money into a fighter or to still to built fighter with an unproven future. Such a MiG-31 of the 90s was not a cheap buy either.
China was looking into own .
Really? But in the same time (early 90x) the production of Su-27 and Su-30 lines was also closed. And btw, Su-30 also existed only in prototypes form with just as uncertain future.
You are speaking about mythical “unwilling” costumers. And i gave you examples of more than willing costumers which was not allowed to buy Mig-31.
ChromYou do not grasp it, do you? To fly something is/was the smaller part of development. I get the feeling, that with a reborn nationalistic proud in Russia, the details which seem not to suit to that feeling were negated again.
Glasnost seems to be no longer in fashion in Russia!From OKB MiG:
“MiG-31M”/05
Still listed as highly classified when the French edition of this book was published in 1991, the MiG-31M was first shown publicly in February 1992. It looks very much alike the MiG-31, but after looking closely one notices many differences. After all, the basic MiG-31 was developed with early-1970s technology; it is no wonder that serious updates were needed.”given by R.A. Belyakov the general designer of MiG design bureau.
How many MiG-31M prototypes/preproduction examples were built at all?!
As I understand it, the MiG-31 offer it is related to former built MiG-31 examples out of service for some years at all.When over 50 % of costs is related to avionics, it is still a formidable task.
I understand the reasons for that proposed swap very well. Without upgrade the stored MiG-31 are uselesss and lost money at all. Because the MiG-25 customers have the related infrastructure still at hand, a generation-jump may look worthwile. They have to pay for the related upgrade-work only. MiG gets the expertise from that, the related work and follow-up orders for maintenance and later upgrades.
And again 1500 letters for nothing. Is it impotant how many prototypes of Mig-31M was built? No. Becouse even basic Mig-31 outfit was very interesting for costumers. And becouse ther was NO big changes in avionic department. So we can conclude what given larger enouth order there would be ZERO problems to fullfill it in resonable time.
Remember, we are speaking here about 90x. Not 2006. Now, of course, basic Mig-31 is not so interesting for costumers. And even upgraded Mig-31M without all these not-yet-fully-developed long range missiles is not that hot.
I’m not dissagreeing with you, but just wanted to point out the fact that there was effort to sell the Mig-31!. Hypotetically speaking, the reason might be a “voice” of high military officials in the government saying not to sell the Mig-31, whereas the press spread out the story about the “wrong trade politics”. But we all know about the arms deal “fever” in nineties, they were selling anything to anyone.
But that exactly what i tell you whole time – allthought formally Mig-31 was open for export in advertising papiers, de-facto it was forbidden to sell. “Wrong trade politic” means what Mig-31 could be approved for sale to India but not to China or Iran or Libiya
Chrom15 years after the MiG-31M and MiG-29M stopped in their tracks the advances in avionic-technology had not stopped either. The systems of old MiG-31 are in need of an upgrade and not of an downgrade to become a MiG-31E. By the way, the differences between export-examples and SU/Russian examples were very limited since the late 80s. Just critical items like the last generation IFF or wiring for atomic-weapons was replaced or delated, when most people have the more published differences from the 70s in mind. To the displeasure of the Russian AF-people, some export-customer have more advanced examples in service!
The SU/Russians had a different approach to bring newer examples and versions into service. For the Tu-160 it is widely published. It was rushed into service, when still at the preproduction stage. None was built to the same standard. Right now the Russian AF starts to bring that at hand to a common standard and add further capabilities.
Before someone start to blame me for bashing the Russians/Chinese, that is not my intention. It is not their problem, when some blind supporters take every written word or claim as ashured. In a similar way I do not take the claims from LM, EADS or Dassault as given.
All above is true, all else from your message is false. Mig-31M(E) was not a whole new plane what would require an extencive testing and finishing, it was merely an upgrade of already full-scale serviceable plane with more than 400 aircrafts built. There was NOTHING in Mig-31M or Mig-31E what could cause development or production problems – the hull was obviosly almost the same, the radar itself was just the same, there was slight changes in radar processing units and general avionics but nothing exceptional. And put all that aside, even basic Soviet made Mig-31 was more than advanced enouth to cause interest of foreign costumers. But – tought luck for Mig-31. It was too advanced for export in countries what could buy it.
ChromИнтерес к МиГ-31Э проявляли многие страны, но ситуация в России и, отчасти, неграмотная торговая политика привели к тому, что очередь была, да рассосалась.
По некоторым сведениям, не-сколько машин, предназначенных на экспорт (надписи на приборной доске на английском ), попали в наши строевые части. [/B]
Translated in short: Many countries shown they interest in Mig-31, but internal situation in Russia and wrong trade politics was leading “очередь была, да рассосалась” (something like no contracts made).
Now my commetary: Thats EXACTLY what i was telling you. Internal situation and wrong trade politic. I.e. there was no approval given for Mig-31 export – at least in abovementioned countries.
ChromBy the way, you gave away, that the “prototypes” and the related “mock-up” weaponary shown by the SU and Russia does not present true combat readiness. No secret really.
Important to note, because several readers did deal with every project shown, that promised performance is the one at hand at all. The MiG-31M stopped in its tracks.
So, you again made illogical statements. MIG-31M was as ready to production as pre-production prototype can be. Would be USSR still in place and would be money for its production available, there is no doubt it will be in full scale production in less than a year. Take for example Mig-29C and R-77: should USSR die 1 year earler, there would be no Mig-29C and R-77 in service. Should USSR die 2 years later, there would be a full-scale R-77 induction in russian service, including Su-27 and Mig-31 variants. But in reality only a couple of Mig-29C and R-77 got in service – but it doesnt mean what they had any problems with service induction.
Now, there is a very good reason why Mig-31 was prohibited to export: As of year 2000 there was NO other fighter aircraft in the world with electronicaly scanned array radar. Simply as that.
ChromWhy I have to answer that question at all. The MiG-31 served in the former PVO as an interceptor with no secondary role AG-role at all. The MiG-31 radar shown in Paris was still in need of development. It was limited to the AA-role similar to F1-standard Rafale at best. A bigger scale JA-37 system with less agility.
From OKB SUKHOI –
The Su-30MK differs from the standard Su-30 in being equipped with a weapon system optimized for a accurate delivery of precision(i.e., laser guided) munitions. Some of the latter claimed to have stand-off ranges of up to 75 miles (120 km). Normal Su-30 weapon capabilities in the air-to-air mode remain intact. – (p239)About surplus speed none was impressed really, when AAMs are much faster.
May it be that you have a special feeling about OKB MiG, when it comes to OKB Sukhoi?!
You again quote some very remotely related text without actually answer the question. Well, i make it for you. As of year 1996 Su-30 offered to Chinese didnt had any ground attack capabilities to speak off. Its radar basicaly was an old Su-27 radar, a whole generation (may be even 1.5 generations) behind Mig-31. Sukhoi design buroe was in very sorry financial state, just as Mig, but Mig had back then better brandname than Sukhoi. And, now, i repeat: Mig-31 was refused to sell in chinese hands despite they interest.
ChromI stick to the first-hand infos of the 90s.
An advanced development of the Su-30, known as the Su-30MK has been unveiled as a deticated two-seat multi-mission fighter. Design and development of this aircraft was initiated during 1991 using Su-27UB “321” and “56”. Conversion of the first of these to Su-30MK configuration was undertaken during 1993. A third aircraft, the Su-27UB prototype, “603”, was completed as well. The Su-30MK has been offered for foreign sale. (Source OKB SUKHOI)
Under Jelzin it was decided to limit future production to the Su-27/T-10 variants and the survival of MiG was in question and still is to some degree.
Yet, you didnt answered my question – WHAT GROUND ATTACK CAPABILITIES HAD SU-30 BACK THEN? Especeally Chinese version? Yet, you didnt answered my another question – HOW MUCH BETTER SU-30 RADAR WAS THAN MIG-31 RADAR?
And Mig-31 high-speed perfomance is just for lunch…
P.S. The surviving of Suhoi, again back then, was even more questionable. Dont carry out present understanding to how things appeared 10 years ago.
ChromAt the same time the Su-27 (Flanker B) was shown in ground attack configuration! (pic of bort 10 as evidence).
The MiG-31 sell was not forbidden as claimed by you. The production of that stopped in Nishny Novogorod in 1991, when the MiG-31M was still under development. In 1990 China had decided for the Su-27 and received production rights in 1996.
First batch ordered in 1991, till that date MiG had still some hopes, and delivered from 1992. By the way the Russians themselves had to decided to stick to the Su-27.
Now, answer me please, what ground attack capability had Su-27 back then? Except dumb bombs (which, btw, Mig-31 can carry just as well)? And what radar had it back then? Hell, even now Chinese Su-30 radars are inferior to basic Mig-31 radar. Should say something to you.
Also, for you education, Russian didnt decided to stick to the Su-27 back then – there was no production plans nor for Mig-29, nor for Su-27, nor for Mig-31. But there was (and is) upgrade plans for all mentioned planes. And none of mentioned planes are out of service.
ChromThe MiG-31 was for sell since 1991. See Aerosalon Paris about that. I still have the related performance and advertisements leaflets from my visit. It was offered to Israel too. The MiG-31 was evaluated by China, but the more multirole Flanker choosen instead.
Yes-yes. They could advertise what they want – the facts however what all sales was prohibited. During 90x there was a true chaos in russian arms business, many companies got rights to sell and advertrise what they want irrespectible of state police – but once deal is ready suddently state come and say “FORBIDDEN!”. There is also a example of Tu-22M3 – it was also in advertising but no-go for selling to Chinese. And btw, there was NO multirole flanker back then.
ChromI have always wondered why the MIG-31 has not had export success. )
Before 21 century Mig-31 was not for sale. Even around year 2k Russia refused to sell Mig-31 to China. Now, i guess, russians are very sorry for such move, but time is gone. Now China dont need expencive Mig-31 as much.
ChromHow dare you speak of bush with such disgust ??? Dont you know he has higher connections???
Ya, Bush admitted what god speaks to him every morning. And that very man call Iranian president as fanatic…
P.S. Su-30 is back, Ivanov said that in his interview.
ChromNo that is not the case at all .– All i am saying is that there is a reason I beleive that the Aim-120C7 is the most advanced missile and most robust program in the world and I have laid out the resons that i base my thinking on which are basically that it incorporates a 2nd generation seeker , second gen. ECCM and electronic capability and a second gen propulsion system which provides greater range and end game manueverabilit. All i want is for someone to come out and tell me why the R-77 is superior so that I should change my point of view . I put the r-77 ahead on propulsion and kinematic range whilest equal on evreything else when i compare the basic varients of the 2 missiles. Now if you are trying to suggest that the basic varient R-77 had a more advanced seeker , more advanced software , more advanced electronics , more advanced ECCM ability etc etc then please state why so that I can add to my knowledge .
.
That is the root of the problem – you are speaking about 2th generation this, 3th generation that, more advanced something… but these are just pretty words without any real factual or technical background. We dont know how much better 2th generation seeker and if its even better than russian 1st generation. “More advanced ECCM” – more advanced than what? Than Aim-120A? I can believe it, after all there is no reason to make it worse. But is it enouth to call it more advanced than R-77? I WANT PROOF! If you ask me for proof what R-77 is better than AIM-120C7, than i ask you for proof what AIM-120C7 is better than R-77. And i want facts, not just pretty acronyms like “more advanced electronic, 3th generation guidance, greater manueverability”. I already gave you examples where russian technology was decades ahead of US ones. So, you cant say what US ones is ALWAYS better and assume it without any proof.
ChromBlahblah. So, you cant offer any proof except “they are constantly make something better!”. I already pointed out what we dont know how much worse/better it was in beginning, how much better it was really made (if at all), and if Russian made something better also. So, you asking others for proofs but you cant offer any proofs yourself.
P.S. Yet, all that in mind, you are somehow insisting what Russian “needs 25 years to catch advanced US technology”. Eh….
P.P.S. Post above is an example of by you so-called non-existant upgrade program for R-77, R-27, R-73 seekers. And only deaf man didnt hear about R-77 ramjet proposal…
ChromOk then Provide me with the facts of the various programs , how they went on acheving the betterment of the standard R-77 and how the R-77 has evolved over the years into the so called new varient that you talk off that is better then the C5 and C7 examples.
.
Ok, you dont listen. Lets just revert things: now YOU will provide the proof what AIM-120C5 is better(or at least equal) than basic version of R-77. WITH HARD FACTS PLEASE! PLEASE NO UNVERIFIED PROPAGANDA! PLEASE NO UNVERIFIED ADVERTISING!
Side-to-side comparasion please.
Sign In
