A

avatar

Guest
Last month's DTI carried a blurb on the Mig-31 BM . the last line talked about the Mig-31 BM's ability to counter stealth cruise missiles and Hypersonics. In this context I propose to start a discussion as to how the Mig-31 BM may indeed accomplish the same.
 
Modified Ks-172? If fired from the forward hemisphere? A derivative of some of the new missiles being developed around the S-400 system should be able to hit a target going at Mach 3.5...

The -BM retains the GSH-6-23 right? The perfect weapon for those stealthy cruise missiles...

Bravado and bragging in hopes of scoring an export order (this particular technique is supposed to allow you to shoot down anything :D )
 
Hypersonic aircraft will not be difficult to intercept. The MiG-31BM will get the MiG-31M's R-37 long-range AAM and should have no problem with an aircraft operating below 100,000 feet. Not sure if the R-37's engagement envelope extends beyond 100,000 feet. The BM will also get an upgraded radar based in part on the MiG-31M's Zaslon-M radar set. Even the original Zaslon had the ability to engage lower-RCS cruise missiles like the AGM-86B, so claiming that the BM can engage stealthy cruise missiles and hypersonic aircraft seems fully within its capabilities.
 
SOC said:
Hypersonic aircraft will not be difficult to intercept. The MiG-31BM will get the MiG-31M's R-37 long-range AAM and should have no problem with an aircraft operating below 100,000 feet. Not sure if the R-37's engagement envelope extends beyond 100,000 feet. The BM will also get an upgraded radar based in part on the MiG-31M's Zaslon-M radar set. Even the original Zaslon had the ability to engage lower-RCS cruise missiles like the AGM-86B, so claiming that the BM can engage stealthy cruise missiles and hypersonic aircraft seems fully within its capabilities.

Provided the Mig-31 is in the right place at the right time. When moving a mile a second that's not going to give the Mig a whole lot of time to get in position depending on how far out the hypersonic aircraft/missile is first picked up.
 
True, of course, but the capability is certainly there. Besides, an aircraft moving at hypersonic speed is going to be detected at an obscene range anyway.
 
Given your comment about detectability and max altitude for the VLRAAMs , would it then be better to engage a hypersonic aircraft with an NCADE type system with an IR seeker?
 
An IR seeker might be a little less accurate as it could have issues discriminating between the airframe and the engine exhaust plume due to the temperatures involved. An IIR seeker may be sufficient, I'd have to look into it.
 
"Foxy Woxy Wows Paris"
Oct 3, 2014 by Bill Sweetman in Ares

Source:
http://aviationweek.com/blog/foxy-woxy-wows-paris-0

The break-up of the Warsaw Pact and Soviet Union was a new era in history, but for those of us who had specialized in writing about Soviet aircraft -- an exercise in open-source intelligence rather than reporting -- it was a change in career. Three years after the first crack in the wall -- the appearance of the MiG-29 at Farnborough -- Russia brought more new aircraft to Paris, including the A-40 amphibian (on AW&ST's cover), and Sukhoi's Mikhail Simonov and Gulfstream's Allen Paulson held a press conference to announce a joint supersonic business jet project. The star exhibit, though, was the MiG-31 Foxhound long-range interceptor.

The MiG-31 was not brand-new -- work had started in the 1970s and the aircraft at the show was eight years old -- but that made its technology more impressive, with the first production, airborne electronically scanned array radar, the ability to carry up to six Vympel R-33 missiles and a higher speed and altitude capability than any Western fighter. Remarkably, the D-30F6 engine -- on display in the Russian pavilion -- was actually derived from the D-30 that powered the already elderly Tu-134, with an afterburner and hot end heavily protected by thermal barrier coatings. "A ceramicist's dream," one US engineer called it.

As AW&ST's editor Don Fink reported, another then-unique feature of the MiG-31 was a datalink system that allowed four fighters to share targeting data, with the leader connected to a specially developed ground network. As a result, the formation could be spread 200 km apart, sweeping a 900 km swath for targets. What the Russians did not say at the time was that this feature was partially based on their supersonic anti-ship missiles: these weapons were designed to operate wolfpack-style against U.S. carrier battle groups, with one weapon popping up to medium altitude on approach to identify the carrier and other high-value targets and designating other missiles to attack.

The MiG-31 had been primarily designed to stop low-flying B-1s and B-52s armed with cruise missiles, but -- as Fink reported -- it was still intended to intercept high-speed, high-flying targets. Officially, there were no such things by June 1991, the SR-71 having been retired the previous year. But oddly enough, a few years later, MiG pitched an export version of an improved MiG-31, the MiG-31FE, with the claim that it could defeat targets flying at Mach 6 and 140,000 feet -– and named that target Aurora.

The full-scale MiG-31 upgrade, the MiG-31M, was unveiled a few months after the 1991 show, but never passed the prototype stage. A less ambitious version, the MiG-31BM, finally entered service in the last couple of years, and the existing fleet is being modernized, with the airframes (still largely made from welded steel, like its MiG-25 ancestor) being overhauled for another 15 years of life. On September 17, the Russian air force reminded everyone that the Mach 2.83 aircraft is still the world's fastest and highest-flying fighter by sending two MiG-31BMs, supported by tankers, to accompany Tu-95 bombers on a foray towards the Alaska coast. Its performance -- a 450-mile radius of action, on internal fuel, at Mach 2.35 -- is still impressive.
 
How does a MIG-31FE intercept a Mach 6 Aurora?

MIG-31 has a 450nm radius at Mach 2.35?! That's pretty good.
 
Same as a Mach 2 Viggen gets parameters on a Mach 3 SR. Depends how predictable the ops are. Start when wee Hamish McSuvorov phones from the Machrihanish fence line to say the op's on today...
 
But oddly enough, a few years later, MiG pitched an export version of an improved MiG-31, the MiG-31FE, with the claim that it could defeat targets flying at Mach 6 and 140,000 feet -– and named that target Aurora.

Reminds me of Victor Belenko's remark that virtually everything the Soviets/Russians knew about potential adversary aircraft came from Western aviation press reports and speculation.
 
Sorry for the Necromancer revival of this thread.

But i thought it be only fitting, as we now see Mig-31K leaving for Syria. Wont surprise me to see them test some kind of new wepons.


Thoughts?
 
Well, I don't see any point in flying 2000km to test Khinzal over the target, so I doubt we'll be seeing that.

Maybe they want to stick "combat proven" on the MiG-31 posters at MAKS (which is about three weeks off).
 
Is it possible to pre-flight program the Kinzhal to do a medium to low flight profile?

If not, would it not be wise to alert some neighbors of Syria prior to launching them..
 
Last edited:
Most likely trying to take a peek at F-35s.
With what, Kinzhal?

I was wondering just a couple of days ago why the F-35s that launched strikes into Syria from HMS Queen Elizabeth were carrying external Sidewinders, but when you think about the Russian presence, it's obvious, and flying with external ordnance will completely invalidate any radar data they manage to pick up, whether from ground radar, MiG 31s or other aircraft.

 
Most likely trying to take a peek at F-35s.
With what, Kinzhal?

I was wondering just a couple of days ago why the F-35s that launched strikes into Syria from HMS Queen Elizabeth were carrying external Sidewinders, but when you think about the Russian presence, it's obvious, and flying with external ordnance will completely invalidate any radar data they manage to pick up, whether from ground radar, MiG 31s or other aircraft.


Never mind the external AAMs*. The F-35s were also flying with luneburg lenses, which should increase RCS far more than LO-optimised pylons/rails/missiles.

* RAF/RN jets are using ASRAAM
 
Most likely trying to take a peek at F-35s.
With what, Kinzhal?
Their own Zaslon-M radar I would assume, can't see a Kinzhal being able to do that..... Mark
I dont think the mig-31k has the radar mounted. I think it is just a reminder they have means of potentially sinking the carrier. Same with the UK flexing its might with their new carrier and kit, which could cause havoc to the ruskies.

I dont like the escalations. Dont think it would lead anywhere but still.
 
Most likely trying to take a peek at F-35s.
With what, Kinzhal?
Wow. Well, here's a lesson for you; the MiG-31 is first and foremost a strategic interceptor.
Wow. Well, here's a lesson for you; Know what you are talking about before being arrogant. MiG-31K carries *only* Kinzhal.
Touché. Still, I find it difficult to believe it has no radar or self-defense capability.
 
They are not using Zaslon-M tho. It was MiG-31M exclusive, which wasn't produced in any significant numbers.
Zaslon-AM(production version of Zaslon-M i guess) mounted on MiG-31BM.
Not really. More like refined and facelifted Zaslon-A. M had bigger array along other things.
Now I wonder how powerful would Zaslon-M with modern signal processing and computers would look like.
1.4 m diameter is nothing to sneeze at.
 
Not really. More like refined and facelifted Zaslon-A. M had bigger array along other things.
Correct. M and AM are very different. IIRC AM has more modifications on the "back-end" and software in general to handle new weapons and targets.
With what, Kinzhal?
Wow. Well, here's a lesson for you; the MiG-31 is first and foremost a strategic interceptor.
Wow. Well, here's a lesson for you; Know what you are talking about before being arrogant. MiG-31K carries *only* Kinzhal.
Touché. Still, I find it difficult to believe it has no radar or self-defense capability.
Believe is something one does in the church. MiG-31K doesnt carry R-33, R-60, R-73, R-74 or R-77-1. It carries Kinzhal only. The only self defense it has is the gun, which is technically not allowed to be used since the 90's IIRC. I wouldnt be too surprised if it doesnt have the radar but dunno.
 
Believe is something one does in the church.

No $hit Sherlock. Maybe I should have just said, "just how much vodka were they drinking when they decided to completely disarm the aircraft". :rolleyes:
 
Believe is something one does in the church.

No $hit Sherlock. Maybe I should have just said, "just how much vodka were they drinking when they decided to completely disarm the aircraft". :rolleyes:

Considering that the armament it is carrying has a range of 1,500-2,000 km, they'd really have to do something very dumb to take it within range of enemy air defenses to launch it.

The thing that has me puzzled it the claimed range of Kinzhal, which is 50% longer when launched from a Tu-22M3 than from the MiG-31K. Does this mean there are two different versions of the missile or is there something really different about the Backfire's launch profile for this weapon?
 
Believe is something one does in the church.

No $hit Sherlock. Maybe I should have just said, "just how much vodka were they drinking when they decided to completely disarm the aircraft". :rolleyes:

Considering that the armament it is carrying has a range of 1,500-2,000 km, they'd really have to do something very dumb to take it within range of enemy air defenses to launch it.

The thing that has me puzzled it the claimed range of Kinzhal, which is 50% longer when launched from a Tu-22M3 than from the MiG-31K. Does this mean there are two different versions of the missile or is there something really different about the Backfire's launch profile for this weapon?
Re. the Mig-31 I'd have thought they'd have wanted to retain it's base capability. Maybe they had to strip it to give it as much payload as possible. Yeah, I'd have thought the Mig-31 would give it more range as well, when launched from a higher speed/altitude than the Backfire could reach.
 
In true rocket nerd fashion I did some calculations related to Kinzhal and Iskander.

9.81×280×ln((3500+500)/(700+500))+1100 = 4400 m/s

3500 kg plus 500 kg warhead, solid fuel 280 seconds isp and a mass fraction of 0.80 (solids, at least rocket upper stages can do far better than: IUS, Pegasus: 0.95)

1100 m/s is an "optimal mach 1 launch boost " 50 000 feet 30 degree AoA. Even without it range is close enough from an old Thor IRBM

Both Tu-22M and MiG-31 could achieve that. If the Tupolev could launch at Mach 2 then +1600 m/s and if the MiG-31 could get close from Mach 3 (I know it can't) then +2000 m/s.

What is sure is that the basic Kinzhal should be worth 3300 m/s without any air launch; and if it can get past 4000 m/s with it, then the 2000 km+ range is not impossible.


In a sense, the Russians re-invented Skybolt 60 years after its cancellation, a smaller variant they clung to their largest / fastest aircraft: Tu-22M and MiG-31.
 
Last edited:
Believe is something one does in the church.

No $hit Sherlock. Maybe I should have just said, "just how much vodka were they drinking when they decided to completely disarm the aircraft". :rolleyes:

Considering that the armament it is carrying has a range of 1,500-2,000 km, they'd really have to do something very dumb to take it within range of enemy air defenses to launch it.

The thing that has me puzzled it the claimed range of Kinzhal, which is 50% longer when launched from a Tu-22M3 than from the MiG-31K. Does this mean there are two different versions of the missile or is there something really different about the Backfire's launch profile for this weapon?
Are there any picture of Tu-22M3 carry Kinzhal?
I thought it used other clubs like Kh-22/32'ish.

It have to be another variant of said Kinzhal(Iskander) if the range is so different.
 
What bothers me is the ceiling - 20 km ? is that a joke ?

The iron rule of ballistics is that if one tries to flatten (depressed) the trajectory by lowering the ceiling, then range instantly takes a big hit.

Most startling example is the much debated suborbital point-to-point topic.

Orbital speed of near 8 km/s provides a range of 12 000 km but hit the lower van Allen belts, 800 miles high.
Trying to lower the peak to, say, 600 km cuts range to 7000 km.

I think the russians may get different ranges by depressing - or not - the trajectory.
In this case, Thor IRBM range of 2400 km may be possible, but with a very high ceiling. Then again, for a unmanned ballistic missile that's hardly an issue...
 
The thing that has me puzzled it the claimed range of Kinzhal, which is 50% longer when launched from a Tu-22M3 than from the MiG-31K. Does this mean there are two different versions of the missile or is there something really different about the Backfire's launch profile for this weapon?
Just means that both range figures are more or less speculations
 
Agreed. Does the supposed range take into consideration the large amount of maneuvering this missile is supposed to do? From what I could gather this thing really doesn't even follow any classic kind of ballistic trajectory and maneuvers throughout its flight. Read somewhere it is capable of 30 + g turns.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom