• Hi Guest! Forum rules have been updated. All users please read here.

MiG-31 satellite launch ?

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,352
Reaction score
4,158
Hi,

does anyone hear about the development of MiG-31 to be use
in satellite launch aircraft ?.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,107
Reaction score
1,096
On June 12 chief of Kazakhstan Aerospace Agency, ex-cosmonaut Talgat Musabayev, offered to Kazakhstan government to move out of Ishim project due to weak marketing studies and unability to move on the space launch market. Effectively, this so far means death of Ishim, as Kazakhstan should finance it.
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,204
Reaction score
46
There have been rumors that this system might be related to the MiG-31D's ASAT vehicle; the MiG-31D certainly helped pave the way for this concept at any rate.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,107
Reaction score
1,096
One hardly would say something about this. -31D (Article "07") stuff stays higly classified.
May be Paralay can add on. Oh, I haven't seen this photo yet...
 

Attachments

  • M31D_antisatellite.JPG
    M31D_antisatellite.JPG
    21.8 KB · Views: 1,208

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,107
Reaction score
1,096
Rumors over here hotly discussed at Novosti Kosmonavtiki forum in MiG-31I thread.
http://www.novosti-kosmonavtiki.ru/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=3050&postdays=0&postorder=asc&start=360

Stated that MiG pilots Menitzky, Aubakirov and Fastovetz performed more than 100 launches of ASAT missile from MiG-31D at Sary-Shagan during 1987-1991 test program according to Menitzky's interview with Vadim Lukashevich. Both were not drunk.
Ishim said to be cover-up either double-use technology program for future development of ASAT missile, Kazakhstan step out said be part of cover up. In fact, do not understand why Kazakhstan desperately needs ASAT missile...
Soviet ASAT program based on E-155N carrier (another MiG-25 variant) said to be started as early as beginning of 60s on direct supervising by Mikoyan, with Spiral ("50x50") being in part inspired by it in 1965.
 

flateric

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
9,107
Reaction score
1,096
Before it's totally gone into the depth of history...
 

Attachments

  • snapshot20071029141707.jpg
    snapshot20071029141707.jpg
    25.8 KB · Views: 141
  • snapshot20071029141700.jpg
    snapshot20071029141700.jpg
    23.8 KB · Views: 133
  • snapshot20071029141654.jpg
    snapshot20071029141654.jpg
    30.4 KB · Views: 191
  • snapshot20071029141646.jpg
    snapshot20071029141646.jpg
    30.8 KB · Views: 213
  • snapshot20071029141640.jpg
    snapshot20071029141640.jpg
    30.2 KB · Views: 879
  • snapshot20071029141625.jpg
    snapshot20071029141625.jpg
    43.5 KB · Views: 919
  • snapshot20071029141613.jpg
    snapshot20071029141613.jpg
    56.7 KB · Views: 878

hesham

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
May 26, 2006
Messages
27,352
Reaction score
4,158
From; МиГ-31 Непревзойденный истребитель-перехватчик

here is a MiG-31I and artist drawing to MiG-31S,but I can't ID if this version for the
same subject here or not ?.
 

Attachments

  • 11.png
    11.png
    97.7 KB · Views: 143
  • 10.png
    10.png
    91.7 KB · Views: 125

antigravite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
745
Reaction score
90
Hmmm…

The first openlit Mig-31 air launcher study I am aware of dates back to 1998. It was issued by MAI, and AirFleet published one or more articles on this "application" at the time.

As it drew attention, I also remember a joint study in around 2000-2002 which involved MAI (Moscow Aviation State University) and USM (University Sains Malaysia). This study focussed on using a modified Mig-31 combined with a rocket sat launcher called MICRO. The whole study was named ABSL. It ended up in a Master's thesis by Kamal Adnan, and in a series of lectures.

Among others, you may access:

AIRCRAFT-BASED SATELLITE LAUNCHING (ABSL) SYSTEM – FUTURE SPACE TRANSPORTATION SYSTEM
Muhammad Shamsul Kamal Adnan & Md. Azlin Md. Said
School of Aerospace Engineering, Engineering Campus, Universiti Sains Malaysia
14300, Nibong Tebal, Penang. Tel: 04-5937788 ext 6513 / Fax: 04-5941026
https://www.dlr.de/iaa.symp/Portaldata/49/Resources/dokumente/archiv5/0810P_Kama_Adnan.pdf

A.
 

Attachments

  • ABSL-MICRO-_airborne_satellite_launcher-Mig31-001.png
    ABSL-MICRO-_airborne_satellite_launcher-Mig31-001.png
    62.2 KB · Views: 90
  • ABSL-MICRO-_airborne_satellite_launcher-Mig31-002.png
    ABSL-MICRO-_airborne_satellite_launcher-Mig31-002.png
    140.9 KB · Views: 91
  • ABSL-MICRO-_airborne_satellite_launcher-Mig31-004.png
    ABSL-MICRO-_airborne_satellite_launcher-Mig31-004.png
    74.5 KB · Views: 59

antigravite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
745
Reaction score
90
flateric said:
One hardly would say something about this. -31D (Article "07") stuff stays higly classified.
May be Paralay can add on. Oh, I haven't seen this photo yet...

Additional contextual info (winglets added for stability).
(Image names unchanged from web search.)

A.
 

Attachments

  • C5aPP6UWgAE7e37.jpg
    C5aPP6UWgAE7e37.jpg
    49 KB · Views: 78
  • mig31d-1.jpg
    mig31d-1.jpg
    27.5 KB · Views: 80
  • Mig-31D.jpg
    Mig-31D.jpg
    33.8 KB · Views: 84

stealthflanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2010
Messages
679
Reaction score
361
This looks interesting.

23867910.jpg
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,678
Reaction score
1,725
Yikes. If they wanted to give their Mig-31 fleet ALBM capability that could get nasty.
 

Deino

ACCESS: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,832
Reaction score
692
Another image ...
 

Attachments

  • MiG-31 Anti-ASAT - 2.jpg
    MiG-31 Anti-ASAT - 2.jpg
    165.2 KB · Views: 431

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,678
Reaction score
1,725
Looks huge for an ASAT. (Unless it can reach up REALLY high. ASM-135 could reach about 600 miles up IIRC.)
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,732
Reaction score
2,365
It looks like between 1/3 and 1/2 the length of the Mig-31 itself - 23 m long, so between 8 m and 12 m. Pretty huge by missile standards indeed.
 

Trident

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
May 8, 2006
Messages
1,057
Reaction score
349
ALBM seems unlikely, the nose cone doesn't look right for a reentry vehicle and there seems to be no good reason not to simply leave it exposed. Unless there is in fact more than one, of course, but as big as that thing is, it doesn't seem to be big enough for a sensible MIRV platform? And anyway, isn't an ALBM basically what Kinzhal already is?

That leaves ABM/ASAT, mini-SLV or some sort of boosted hypersonics test bed, as TomcatViP suggested. The size and configuration match the SLV concept shown in earlier posts in this thread, so chances are that's what it is.
 

DrRansom

I really should change my personal text
Joined
Dec 15, 2012
Messages
539
Reaction score
11
It could be a satellite launch vehicle - that'd be a pretty standard application.

Or, it could be a super-sized ASAT which can reach higher (much higher?) than low earth orbit.

Of course, the answer probably is "why not both?"
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,678
Reaction score
1,725
From AvWeek:

"The characteristics of the current system remain unknown. But they are probably similar to those of the previous Kontakt system, which was intended to destroy nonmaneuvering or maneuvering satellites in low orbits.
The 79M6 missile, weighing 4,550 kg (10,000 lb.), was launched by a MiG-31D flying at a speed of Mach 2.55 and altitude of 22 km. "


:eek:
 

antigravite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
745
Reaction score
90
sferrin said:
From AvWeek:

"The characteristics of the current system remain unknown. But they are probably similar to those of the previous Kontakt system, which was intended to destroy nonmaneuvering or maneuvering satellites in low orbits.
The 79M6 missile, weighing 4,550 kg (10,000 lb.), was launched by a MiG-31D flying at a speed of Mach 2.55 and altitude of 22 km. "


:eek:

Thx. Interesting. What is the exact source, please?

A.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
13,678
Reaction score
1,725
antigravite said:
sferrin said:
From AvWeek:

"The characteristics of the current system remain unknown. But they are probably similar to those of the previous Kontakt system, which was intended to destroy nonmaneuvering or maneuvering satellites in low orbits.
The 79M6 missile, weighing 4,550 kg (10,000 lb.), was launched by a MiG-31D flying at a speed of Mach 2.55 and altitude of 22 km. "


:eek:

Thx. Interesting. What is the exact source, please?

A.

Aviation Week. 10/08/2018.
 

antigravite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
745
Reaction score
90
Hi,

I stumbled upon this old (2018) article which I reference herein for information completion.

Tyle Rogoway & Ivan Voukadinov, "Exclusive: Russian MiG-31 Foxhound Carrying Huge Mystery Missile Emerges Near Moscow —
The big rocket is likely to be either a space-launch system or an anti-satellite weapon, and maybe even both." The Drive, 29/09/2018

A.

message-editor_1538276440826-ada1e21.jpg
 

greenmartian2017

I really should change my personal text
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
93
Reaction score
50
US Navy/NOTS back in the late 1950s/early 1960s successfully demonstrated both capabilities. (See Hi Hoe)
 

antigravite

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Apr 25, 2008
Messages
745
Reaction score
90
US Navy/NOTS back in the late 1950s/early 1960s successfully demonstrated both capabilities. (See Hi Hoe)
yes, indeeed.

A.

[references edited]
 
Last edited:

Prussian Mauser

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
3
Reaction score
2
US Navy/NOTS back in the late 1950s/early 1960s successfully demonstrated both capabilities. (See Hi Hoe)
yes, indeeed.

A.
Not to mention the USAF's Project Jaguar, which was ostensibly a sounding rocket designed to sample sub-orbital radiation effects from nuclear warhead detonations. It was launched from a Martin B-57 Canberra...
 

Prussian Mauser

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Jun 13, 2019
Messages
3
Reaction score
2
US Navy/NOTS back in the late 1950s/early 1960s successfully demonstrated both capabilities. (See Hi Hoe)
yes, indeeed.

A.
Not to mention the USAF's Project Jaguar, which was ostensibly a sounding rocket designed to sample sub-orbital radiation effects from nuclear warhead detonations. It was launched from a Martin B-57 Canberra...
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,732
Reaction score
2,365

I did some basic calculations.
A 12 metric tons, 2-stage rocket with Block D RD-58 kerolox engines, 345 second specific impulse and 0.90 prop mass fraction, boosted 2000 m/s by a Mach 3 MiG-25 - could lift 1 metric ton to orbit.
A very respectable number.
 

paralay

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 2, 2006
Messages
154
Reaction score
59
I did some basic calculations.
A 12 metric tons, 2-stage rocket with Block D RD-58 kerolox engines, 345 second specific impulse and 0.90 prop mass fraction, boosted 2000 m/s by a Mach 3 MiG-25 - could lift 1 metric ton to orbit.
The MiG-25 can carry a device weighing no more than 5000-6000 kg under the fuselage
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,732
Reaction score
2,365
Good to know ! Probably closer from 1000 - 1500 pounds then...
 

kocovgoce

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
43
Reaction score
44
Hi,

does anyone hear about the development of MiG-31 to be use
in satellite launch aircraft ?.
Just like the MiG-25 at a 45-degree angle at a height of 10 km with maximum speed you start climbing the MiG-25 at an altitude of over 20 km and by inertia and low air resistance somewhere a plane can move at an altitude of 30 -35 km in height and then you launch the carrier rocket and because at this height you have quite small air and thus little resistance but also acceleration of the rocket from the aircraft itself up to 2.8 Mach or 3 Mach gave more more potential For example if this rocket is fire on the sea levеl аnd has a range of 50 km but if this rocket is fire of 35 km altitude would have a range of 6 times more due to poor air resistance but also acceleration and will reach a distance of 250-300 km or leo orbit.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
4,732
Reaction score
2,365
This link to a paper has some good numbers about the delta-v gains provided by air-launch.


A study by Klijn et al. concluded that at an altitude of 15250m, a rocket launch with the carrier vehicle having a zero launch velocity at an angle of attack of 0° to the horizontal experienced a Δv benefit of approximately 600m/s.
The zero launch velocity situations can be used to represent the launch from a balloon as it has no horizontal velocity.

A launch at a velocity of 340m/s at the same altitude and angle of attack resulted in a Δv benefit of approximately 900m/s.

Furthermore, by increasing the angle of attack of the carrier vehicle to 30° and launching at 340m/s, a Δv gain of approximately 1100m/s was obtained.

Increasing the launch velocity to
- 681m/s produced a Δv gain of 1600m/s
- 1021m/s produced a Δv gain of 2000m/s​

At the end of the day
- launching from a balloon: +600 m/s
- launching at mach 1 and 30 degree AoA: +1100 m/s
- 681 m/s is mach 2 and the gain is +1600 m/s
- 1021 m/s is mach 3 and the gain is +2000 m/s

-Earth orbit is 9200 m/s (average) :
7700 m/s + 1500 m/s of gravity + drag + steering losses.

- The rocket equation has a logarithm stuck into it so it is not linear or decimal. For example, substracting 2000 m/s from 8000 m/s is NOT a 25% gain but much less (barely 10%). Energy-wise, launch to orbit is VERY horrible - notably the segment between 6 km/s and 9 km/s.

- The air-launch gain tends to diminish despite the carrier aircraft flying faster and faster. Mach 1 = +1100 m/s BUT Mach 2 does not bring a 2200 m/s gain and Mach 3 gain is even less.

- When you think about it, trippling the aircraft mothership speed
(mach 1 > mach 3) barely double the "air launch gain"
(1100 m/s > 2000 m/s)
Must be because of the heat barrier and hypersonics (IMHO).

- Launching from above 40 000 feet doesn't bring any benefit at least for orbital launches (ALBM, ASAT, ABM may not agree)

- Angle-of-attack is actually more important than altitude. Launching "nose up" greatly helps, throwing the rocket downwards dangling from a parachute = bad.
 
Last edited:

kocovgoce

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Oct 23, 2020
Messages
43
Reaction score
44
A heat shield is required like on kf-47 kinzhal. However with KINZHAL proved that from MiG-31 could be launched rocekt at high altitude and large speeds for greater range

 

trose213

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jul 29, 2018
Messages
148
Reaction score
53
This link to a paper has some good numbers about the delta-v gains provided by air-launch.


A study by Klijn et al. concluded that at an altitude of 15250m, a rocket launch with the carrier vehicle having a zero launch velocity at an angle of attack of 0° to the horizontal experienced a Δv benefit of approximately 600m/s.
The zero launch velocity situations can be used to represent the launch from a balloon as it has no horizontal velocity.

A launch at a velocity of 340m/s at the same altitude and angle of attack resulted in a Δv benefit of approximately 900m/s.

Furthermore, by increasing the angle of attack of the carrier vehicle to 30° and launching at 340m/s, a Δv gain of approximately 1100m/s was obtained.

Increasing the launch velocity to
- 681m/s produced a Δv gain of 1600m/s
- 1021m/s produced a Δv gain of 2000m/s​

At the end of the day
- launching from a balloon: +600 m/s
- launching at mach 1 and 30 degree AoA: +1100 m/s
- 681 m/s is mach 2 and the gain is +1600 m/s
- 1021 m/s is mach 3 and the gain is +2000 m/s

-Earth orbit is 9200 m/s (average) :
7700 m/s + 1500 m/s of gravity + drag + steering losses.

- The rocket equation has a logarithm stuck into it so it is not linear or decimal. For example, substracting 2000 m/s from 8000 m/s is NOT a 25% gain but much less (barely 10%). Energy-wise, launch to orbit is VERY horrible - notably the segment between 6 km/s and 9 km/s.

- The air-launch gain tends to diminish despite the carrier aircraft flying faster and faster. Mach 1 = +1100 m/s BUT Mach 2 does not bring a 2200 m/s gain and Mach 3 gain is even less.

- When you think about it, trippling the aircraft mothership speed
(mach 1 > mach 3) barely double the "air launch gain"
(1100 m/s > 2000 m/s)
Must be because of the heat barrier and hypersonics (IMHO).

- Launching from above 40 000 feet doesn't bring any benefit at least for orbital launches (ALBM, ASAT, ABM may not agree)

- Angle-of-attack is actually more important than altitude. Launching "nose up" greatly helps, throwing the rocket downwards dangling from a parachute = bad.

The key here is the acceleration of the the aircraft before launch.
 

Similar threads

Top