MiG MFI / I-90 - MiG 1.44 / MiG 1.42

Some old but interesting Russian news show us about the Russian military’s attitude toward the 1.44：

<The only prototype of the fifth-generation fighter has been mothballed 26.12.2013 via.Известия>

According to Colonel General Anatoly Sitnov, former Chief of Armaments of the Russian Armed Forces, the T 50 fighter, which superseded the Mig 1.44, does not possess potential comparable to that of the Mig 1.44.

However, General of the Army Vladimir Mikhailov, former Air Force Commander-in-Chief, believes that the two fighters cannot be compared, because electronic technology has advanced significantly over the past 15 years.

“You can't say that the Mig 1.44 is better than the T 50—everything is relative. The T 50 incorporates the latest developments,” Mikhailov emphasized.

According to the former Air Force Commander-in-Chief, the decision to mothball the prototype of the first fifth-generation fighter may indicate the existence of plans for the project.

“The Mig 1.44 is being put in a hangar so that it can later be used in the development of new models. That's the only goal,” Mikhailov emphasized.

По мнению бывшего начальника вооружения ВС генерал-полковника Анатолия Ситнова, вытеснивший миговское творение истребитель Т-50 не обладает потенциалом, сравнимым с заложенным в МиГ 1.44.

Однако бывший главком ВВС генерал армии Владимир Михайлов считает, что сравнивать эти два истребителя нельзя - технологии электроники ушли далеко вперед за 15 лет.

- Нельзя говорить, что МиГ 1.44 лучше Т-50 - всё относительно. В Т-50 использованы новейшие разработки, - подчеркнул Михайлов.

По мнению бывшего главкома ВВС, решение о консервации прототипа первого истребителя пятого поколения может говорить о существовании планов в отношении проекта.

- МиГ 1.44 убирают в ангар, чтобы потом использовать его при разработке каких-то новых образцов. Это единственная цель, - подчеркнул Владимир Михайлов.
Click to expand...

“1.44 or T 50?”
Well… in the minds of the “old guard” of the Russian military leadership… it is still a topic worth discussing.

Others:
In my alternate-history novel, MiG ultimately completed this project and began fielding it under the name “Mig 39.” I really like this aircraft… also…
“Mig 39——Raptor Killer”
（Just a good wish, haha, although, good wishes often cannot be realized）
1758206944983.png
 
Last edited:
Suslova said:
“1.44 or T 50?”
Well… in the minds of the “old guard” of the Russian military leadership… it is still a topic worth discussing.
Click to expand...
Well, choice is rather direct - 1.42 replaces su-35 (which was in effect its substitute), and in 2010s Russia has proper 4.5 gen aircraft, in high enough numbers by 2020s.
And maybe light 5th gen fighter in early testing around now.

Which is worse (less capability most of the time) than how VKS got it IRL.
 
G2JOSU8WcAAu-i6


https://twitter.com/x/status/1973225822959051195
View: https://x.com/TucsonFulcrum/status/1973225822959051195
 
flateric said:
This is not 1.42
https://www.secretprojects.co.uk/threads/soviet-high-supersonic-hypersonic-aircraft.9585/post-763169
Click to expand...
Thanks. I'd always wondered if it was a early soviet tunnel model, a model of MiG 1.42, also I'd heard it was actually from DARPA.

Yefim Gordon mentions that in his book, and it seems he doesn't bother to check his sources.

For example, he includes a series of photographs, supposedly captured from a video, of the Su-57 launching an R-77 AAM from the cargo bay as if it were a real launch, when in fact it's a simulation.

A friend once contacted a well-known Western writer specializing in Asian and Middle Eastern air forces, and he didn't give him good references about Yefim Gordon and his use of other people's works.
 
Last edited:
Erdosain said:
Thanks. I'd always wondered if it was a early soviet tunnel model, a model of MiG 1.42, also I'd heard it was actually from DARPA.
Click to expand...
Graphics - drawings from an American research article on a promising fighter
 

Attachments

  • prototip1.jpg
    prototip1.jpg
    114.5 KB · Views: 253
  • mfi3.jpg
    mfi3.jpg
    25.1 KB · Views: 166
  • mfi2.jpg
    mfi2.jpg
    8.1 KB · Views: 148
  • mfi1.jpg
    mfi1.jpg
    15.8 KB · Views: 158
  • 4200.JPG
    4200.JPG
    126 KB · Views: 198
Last edited:

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20251005_090035_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20251005_090035_Chrome.jpg
    147.7 KB · Views: 202
  • Screenshot_20251005_090111_Chrome.jpg
    Screenshot_20251005_090111_Chrome.jpg
    165.7 KB · Views: 220
About air intake of the 1.44, wedge-shaped or rectangular?

The issue with the 1.44 lay in the supercritical characteristics of the air intake (ППП).
The second problem was the mutual influence between the two engines when one of them experienced surge. It took a great deal of effort to convince Shedov and Belyakov to accept this layout. At that time, the people from the Tupolev Design Bureau were very helpful — they shared the painful lessons they had learned from using a grouped four-engine layout on the Tu-144, which played a persuasive role.
In terms of performance, this intake configuration was by no means inferior, and moreover, it was a ventral intake.

Касательно конструкции ВЗ у 1.42 от непосредственного участника разработки:
Проблема 1.44 была в ППП.Вторая проблема - взаимовлияние при помпаже одного двигателя. Стоило больших трудов убедить Седова и Белякова перейти на эту схему. Очень помогли тогда туполевцы, которые поделились горьким опытом пакета из 4х двигателей Ту-144. Это убедило. По характеристикам этот в-к ничем не хуже, он подфюзеляжный.
Click to expand...
 
The 1.44 air intake is made in the form of a bucket, which allows you to protect the engine compressors from enemy radar.
The air intake 1.42 has a wedge-shaped shape, which reduces the mutual influence of the engines
 
topspeed3 said:
Almost 22 meters long and 17 meters span...Mtow 37 metric tons.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_Project_1.44

F-22 is 4 meters shorter and 3,5 meters in span....yet Mtow is 1 metric ton more.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lockheed_Martin_F-22_Raptor

Aerodynamic efficiency better in 3 years older F-22 ?
Click to expand...
Well... According to the “reliable comrade” Parlay said, Izdelie 1.42 — the number 42 actually refers to the aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight (or around the 40-ton class)
If I’m not mistaken
 
Suslova said:
Well... According to the “reliable comrade” Parlay said, Izdelie 1.42 — the number 42 actually refers to the aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight (or around the 40-ton class)
If I’m not mistaken
Click to expand...
So Mig 1.44 would be 44 tons ?

Wing area is cited to be 320 m2

The wing area of the MiG 1.44 is approximately 320 square meters (m2m squared). While some sources do not list this specification, this is the most commonly cited figure in technical data tables for the aircraft.
  • Wing area:

    320 m
 
topspeed3 said:
So Mig 1.44 would be 44 tons ?

Wing area is cited to be 320 m2

The wing area of the MiG 1.44 is approximately 320 square meters (m2m squared). While some sources do not list this specification, this is the most commonly cited figure in technical data tables for the aircraft.
  • Wing area:

    320 m
Click to expand...
320 square meters is close to the wing area of an Airbus A330. The MiG-31 and Su-27 are 60 - 70 square meters, but I would expect the 1.44 to have a wing area closer to the F-22 and J-20, which are 70 - 80 square meters.
 
Suslova said:
Well... According to the “reliable comrade” Parlay said, Izdelie 1.42 — the number 42 actually refers to the aircraft’s maximum takeoff weight (or around the 40-ton class)
If I’m not mistaken
Click to expand...

Aaz> They tweaked it until the late 1990s, but to no avail—as Samoylovich used to say, "Mistakes made at the concept stage cannot be corrected in design." The vehicle was significantly overweight: the calculated normal (!) Gо=32 tons, and the technical specifications were not met—to achieve this, the weight would have to be increased to over 36 tons (but this is purely theoretical—the engine would then have to be redesigned).
Click to expand...
 
Not James Stockdale said:
320 square meters is close to the wing area of an Airbus A330. The MiG-31 and Su-27 are 60 - 70 square meters, but I would expect the 1.44 to have a wing area closer to the F-22 and J-20, which are 70 - 80 square meters.
Click to expand...
32 m2 was also suggested...it sounds too small.
 
hesham said:
By the way,

the Izdelie 41 was appeared at first in 1981,with side intakes
and powered by one turbofan engine
Click to expand...
Are there any speculative images of the Izdeliye 41?

I understand there was a first design iteration with a conventional configuration and a second iteration with a configuration similar to the Saab Gripen.
 
Erdosain said:
Are there any speculative images of the Izdeliye 41?

I understand there was a first design iteration with a conventional configuration and a second iteration with a configuration similar to the Saab Gripen.
Click to expand...

To be honest, I don't have,but for second configuration, yes
it had a canard.
 

Similar threads

Back
Top Bottom