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

MiG PAK DP (Prospective Airborne Complex of Long-Range Intercept) Program (MiG-41)

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
264
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Russia to develop and field MiG-31 Foxhound replacement by 2020"

by Dave Majumdar
on April 15, 2013

Source:
http://www.flightglobal.com/blogs/the-dewline/2013/04/russia-to-develop-and-field-mi.html

The Russian Air Force hopes to develop and field a replacement for its venerable Mikoyan MiG-31 Foxhound interceptors by 2020, Russian media outlet Ria Novosti reports. If all goes according to plan, the MiG-31 would then be retired by 2028.

"We have started development of a new aircraft of this type and I think we can develop this plane before the state armament program ends in 2020," says Lt Gen Viktor Bondarev, commander of the Russian Air Force. "The new plane should replace the existing fleet by 2028," he adds.

According to Ria Novosti, Bondarev argues against restarting production of the Foxhound and says that Russia needs a new clean sheet design. Russia continues to modernize its MiG-31 fleet to the new BM standard. Sixty jets are expected to be upgraded by 2020.

Russia currently has over 122 MiG-31s in its inventory.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
264
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Russia working on a new long range interceptor to replace the Mig-31 Foxhound"
April 14, 2013
Posted by Jacek Siminski

Source:
http://theaviationist.com/2013/04/14/mig31-replacement/#.UWxDKsotcug

During Lt. Gen. Viktor Bondarev’s conference, during which information on PAK-DA bomber was released to the public, the Air Force Commander also mentioned that Russia has started working on MiG-31 replacement.

It is an interesting phenomenon that the Russians still aim at single-purposed specialized designs, whereas the US designs are predominantly multi-role.

Bondarev said that the Russian Federation would need a fighter interceptor for defense forces that would be compliant with the requirements of the modern battlefield. Taking into account the fact, that the territory of Russia is extremely vast, it is crucial to have efficient plane which could be able to operate effectively in the huge airspace.

The Soviet designers were working on a Multifunctional Distant Interceptor concept named Product 7.01 in the ’80s, but ultimately the project was abandoned.

The concept was developed at the same time the MiG 1.44 prototype was created. Nevertheless the details of this project are not widely known. In 1993 it was considered to become a high-speed business jet.

The MiG-31 is the derivative of the MiG-25, a Cold War icon, even though often believed to be its version.

This is a common mistake as the MiG-31 is a two-seater built using a completely different airframe, and for a completely different purpose. The second crew member plays a role of WSO (Weapon System Operator).

The MiG-25 was built as a high-speed, high-altitude interceptor, capable of reaching the speed of Mach 3.2. Such technical specification would allow the Foxbat to be a plane able to combat the American B-58 and B-70 bombers. Secondly, that made the airframe of the MiG-25 quite strong, what made it a good base for the Foxhound.

The Foxhound is in service since 1983, with a purpose of patrolling the under-protected areas.

The MiG-31′s adversary has a quite different character, as it was designed to be a measure against the B-1B bomber, which was designed to operate at low level, below the radar coverage. Hence the MiG-31 has quite good low-level capabilities (which MiG-25 does not) and is equipped with an advanced radar with look-down-shoot-down capability needed to detect low-flying bombers, and data bus, allowing for coordinated attack with other fighters.

What is more, unlike the Mig-25, the Foxhound features a HUD display. Regarding the low-level characteristics, the MiG-31 is not a dogfighter. It is a high-performance aircraft, similarly to the MiG-25, which exploits speed and altitude to its main advantage.

Despite the fact that the Mig-31 is quite obsolete, it is still one of the most amazing interceptors ever built, with top speed of Mach 2.83 and a range of 1,450 km. Being a Mig-25 derivative it has high supersonic cruise speed, and can fly higher than the incoming fighter escort.

According to Bondarev modernizing all of the Russian MiG-31s to BM standard, which includes new radar with a range of 320 km, new avionics and fire control system would cost over 50 billion rubles.

In other words it is not an affordable course of events. Nevertheless the remaining 60 of of MiG-31s are to be modernized by Sokol aviation facility.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
264
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
"Russia to Field MiG-31 Replacement by 2020--Commander"

Source:
http://en.ria.ru/military_news/20130411/180584483.html

MOSCOW, April 11 (RIA Novosti) – The Russian Air Force is hoping to receive a new long-range fighter-interceptor by 2020 and retire its existing fleet of MiG-31 interceptors by 2028, Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Viktor Bondarev said on Thursday.

“We have started development of a new aircraft of this type and I think we can develop this plane before the state armament program ends in 2020,” Bondarev said at a meeting with Russian lawmakers.

“The new plane should replace the existing fleet by 2028,” he said.

Bondarev spoke out against restarting production of the MiG-31, which was stopped 20 years ago, saying the country needs a totally new interceptor to meet modern requirements.

The Russian Air Force has 122 MiG-31 interceptors in service and more aircraft in reserve, he said.

The MiG-31, the fastest fighter-interceptor in service anywhere in the world, has recently been the subject of a comprehensive upgrade to MiG-31BM standard.

The MiG-31BM has a range of 900 miles (1,450 km) on internal fuel, which can be extended to 3,355 miles (5,400 km) with air-to-air refueling.

The modernized version boasts upgraded avionics and digital data-links, a new multimode radar, color multifunction cockpit displays, and a more powerful fire-control system. It can simultaneously track up to 10 targets.

The two-seat MiG-31 can intercept targets up to 124 miles (200 km) away thanks to its advanced radar and long-range missiles. The Air Force said in 2012 it was testing a new long-range missile for the MiG-31, which analysts who spoke to RIA Novosti said was likely to be the K-37M, also known as RVV-BD (NATO AA-X-13 Arrow).

The Russian Air Force has previously said it intends to take delivery of up to 60 MiG-31BMs by 2020, under a contract signed with United Aircraft Corporation in 2011.

MiG-31 interceptors are an integral part of a comprehensive aerospace defense network being created in Russia to thwart any potential airborne threats, including ballistic and cruise missiles.
 

Grey Havoc

The path not taken.
Senior Member
Joined
Oct 9, 2009
Messages
9,708
Reaction score
503
Does the new new design derive anything from the Mig 7.01/Mig-701 I wonder?

Hats off to Jozef and paralay for the following:





 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
264
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Viktor Bondarev said that the Russian Federation needs "a totally new interceptor to meet modern requirements." This comment leads me to believe that they are starting with a blank sheet.
 

Deino

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 2, 2006
Messages
2,570
Reaction score
194
Triton said:
Air Force Commander Lt. Gen. Viktor Bondarev said that the Russian Federation needs "a totally new interceptor to meet modern requirements." This comment leads me to believe that they are starting with a blank sheet.
But if they just begin with this design right now, then "to Field MiG-31 Replacement by 2020" is completely impossible !
 

2IDSGT

Ah tale yew wut!
Joined
Nov 27, 2012
Messages
371
Reaction score
1
Purdy... I hope they spend every last dime necessary to make it; what with all the supersonic bombers that we'll have for them to intercept in the future. ;)

I just love the direction that Russia's defense spending has taken of late, though I was disappointed when they gave up on the supersonic/hypersonic design for the PAK-DA. I was really looking forward to that. :'(
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
571
2IDSGT said:
I just love the direction that Russia's defense spending has taken of late,
Given the direction the US's spending has taken I don't.
 

Triton

Donald McKelvy
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 14, 2009
Messages
9,723
Reaction score
264
Website
deeptowild.blogspot.com
Deino said:
But if they just begin with this design right now, then "to Field MiG-31 Replacement by 2020" is completely impossible !
We'll just have to wait and see as details emerge whether "a totally new interceptor to meet modern requirements" is puffery on the part of Bondarev and whether a design bureau has just started work on a MiG-31 replacement or if the project has been ongoing for several years before Bondanev's announcement.
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,713
Reaction score
1,434
Can't see many options beyond a (stretched?) version of T-50 with extra fuel and 5th gen engines.
 

saintkatanalegacy

Little Miss Whiffologist
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
718
Reaction score
1
^That would be interesting to see. Probably with a redesigned inlet and structural frame.
 

Rhinocrates

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Sep 26, 2006
Messages
209
Reaction score
43
It would be designed to counter whatever threats it would be most likely to face. The MiG-25 was an interceptor meant to counter the B-70 and the MiG-31 was meant to counter the B-1B. I don't think that it will be "the same but better" in terms of the performance of the MiG-31 to counter the B-70 or B-1, but the B-2 and more importantly, the hypothetical (so far) NGB/B-3, not to mention whatever European NATO forces can deploy, such as BAE's Taranis.


I'd think of some basic characteristics such as ruggedness to serve at distant bases (which is typically Russian), ability to scramble quickly, cover long ranges and be on station quickly, so supercruise is very likely.


It would be more of a classical interceptor, so stealth and agility would be a relatively low priority, but ability to network with other aircraft and satellites would be a high priority. Advanced armament would be too. Expect new air to air missiles to be developed in parallel. Expect also computing ability to sort through and select targets relying on inputs through networks. Maybe it will depend on patrolling UCAVs to provide information? Will it be facing many stealthy UCAVs? Don't think of it as a single aircraft, think of it as part of a defense system.


The T-50 is a relatively stealthy, relatively agile aircraft intended to be an air superiority fighter with other secondary roles. I don't think that that will be a priority for the MiG-31 replacement, so I don't think that it will be the basis for its design.



The Russians do tend to prefer specialised platforms operating within a system of other specialised aircraft as opposed to multirole ones (that nowadays are also networked)... but economics may indeed determine that a modified version of an existing platform will be chosen. Still, my feeling is that the MiG-31 replacement won't be a world away from the MiG 701 conceptually, and not so very close to the T-50.


I think that the first question is, what threat do they expect to face? The second question is how would they counter it?
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
571
I would think lots of size and speed (to cover long distances quickly), no stealth (no need), a big AESA and IRST.
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
835
Reaction score
9
Remember these statements were made at a hearing to revive MiG-31 production, hosted by a commie. (nuff said)

So to me it sounded more like "STFU, we will make a new aircraft alright, doesn't need to restart the MiG-31 production." Basically trying to curb the willingness to restart production before it gets any traction.
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
835
Reaction score
9
It is pure speculation. If attached it should be moved the Theoretical and speculative projects.
 

Stargazer2006

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 25, 2009
Messages
13,242
Reaction score
191
flanker said:
It is pure speculation. If attached it should be moved the Theoretical and speculative projects.
Images from said PDF moved to the Theoretical and Speculative Projects section.
 

aam641

One needs a personality to have a personal text!
Joined
Dec 27, 2011
Messages
107
Reaction score
4
Does anybody here know how MiG-31s usually operate? Are they scrambled after ground radar detects something? Or, do they maintain a patrol near the border?
 

flanker

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
835
Reaction score
9
AdamF said:
Does anybody here know how MiG-31s usually operate? Are they scrambled after ground radar detects something? Or, do they maintain a patrol near the border?
Not sure, but ground radar can detect the target, MiG-31 scramble and the information can be sent to it. Then it fires.

It is also possible for MiG-31 to work in groups and exchange information between them. 4 of them can cover an area of 1000 km for instance. So one MiG-31 can actually track the target, send the information about it to the next guy and he can fire at it.
 

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,938
Reaction score
38
I assume their level of patrol varied depending on alert status etc.

In the period where the Mig-31 was being deployed the Russians were emphasizing long range anti-radiation missiles to take out major radar warning facilities and special anti-AWACs weapons. It follows that they would expect the enemy to do the same. After the first few days of a major conflict a lot of the ground control infrastructure would go dark.

Russian fighters in the early 1980s were still quite dependent on ground vectoring to be effective outside of visual range. The Mig-31 was an exception, with a robust track-while-scan capability, data sharing and a powerful radar. If I recall correctly, the two-seater was expected to help coordinate and direct Su-27s and Migs to their targets (like a miniature AWAC).
 

aam641

One needs a personality to have a personal text!
Joined
Dec 27, 2011
Messages
107
Reaction score
4
As I recall, MiG-31 was intended to deal with B-1B and cruise missiles, which were flying too low to be detected by ground radar. This would require a long patrol. Any reliable data out there on 31's patrol endurance? It probably isn't exceptional, since MiG-25 air-frame was built for high speed dash.
 

piko1

< LFM Cow Level >
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
143
Reaction score
4
the Foxhound was intended to deal with B-1B and cruise missiles yes and many more even to deal with ballistic missiles
but i tough that Su-30 was meant to replace MiG-31 and from what remember they often patrol in the sky of barenc sea but the idea was to patrol over the ice cap where the USSR was vulnerable to invades the refueling probe was added to extend the patrol time or that's what i remember

Stargazer2006 you posted a fan made project Harpoon i think
http://www.sdbp-harpoon.narod.ru/Index.htm


and the next gen heavy fighter that paralay have in he's pdf is hum let say too fancy sr-71sh Su-34 PAK-FA TU-22 hybrid (sorry i mean kitbash )
 

overscan

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Dec 27, 2005
Messages
11,713
Reaction score
1,434
AdamF said:
As I recall, MiG-31 was intended to deal with B-1B and cruise missiles, which were flying too low to be detected by ground radar. This would require a long patrol. Any reliable data out there on 31's patrol endurance? It probably isn't exceptional, since MiG-25 air-frame was built for high speed dash.

Endurance: 3.6 hours, 6-7 hours with one refuelling.
Combat radius, 4 R-33: 720km (supersonic, Mach 2.35), 1200km (subsonic), 1400km (subsonic with drop tanks) 2000km (subsonic with drop tanks, one refuelling)
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
571
Just a point of interest. I was thumbing through a book about variuous "incidents" in B&N years ago (stuff like the Gulf of Sydra, KAL 007 etc.) and they had an interesting bit of information on the latter. Some might recall that F-15s and an E-3 were sent to the general area immediately after the shootdown and that the USSR responded by sending Mig-31s to the area. One of the F-15 pilots being interviewed commented that the Mig-31s "made the 620 mile run down at Mach 2.6".
 

piko1

< LFM Cow Level >
Joined
May 20, 2009
Messages
143
Reaction score
4
it's sad that the type 05 (31M) didn't made any further than a prototypes it had such a potential in it i still tend to like how big 31 looks next to the midgits F-15 and 22 :D

but the question is why they don't upgrade it with new radar complex and IRIST AESA and OK let's add the new engines from PAK-FA that would be like completely new plane but it's just me thinking that MiG-31 have larger development potential in it
 

topspeed3

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 31, 2011
Messages
215
Reaction score
1
Website
max3fan.blogspot.com
Triton said:
sanjeev.k said:
Paralay has posted a pdf showing speculative renderings of what I guess might be a MiG-31 replacement. One of the renderings also shows a scaled up PAK-FA. See here->http://paralay.com/stat/MFP2.pdf
Is paralay an aviation hobbyist? What is his background?
I have no idea...but he was also the first to know here what a PAK-FA looks like.

I wonder where he got this double cranked delta wing design...we just discussed such planform at Key Publishing 3-4 weeks ago. The F-16XL seemed to be out standing design...albeit lost compeptition to F-15E.

How come I get the feeling this craft is just like PAK-FA...similar size and stealth and speed ???

What they don't have is asmall fighter like JSF with stealth features.
 
R

Radical

Guest
http://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/ain-defense-perspective/2014-04-24/mig-aviadvigatel-confirm-mig-31-development

Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG and Aviadvigatel have confirmed that work continues on “radical modernization” of the MiG-31 Foxhound, with the focus on extending the performance of the aging, out-of-production Mach 3 interceptor so that it can carry out not only air-defense duties but also serve the recently established VKO, the Russian acronym for the country’s Air and Space Defense (Command). Under a directive from the Russian defense ministry, RAC MiG is working on new versions of the aircraft more capable than the current MiG-31BM.

Speaking to AIN at the Engines-2014 exposition held April 15 to 17 in Moscow, Aleksander Inozemtsev, executive director and general designer at the Aviadvigatel aero-engine design house, said that although the MiG-31 has been in service for more than a quarter century, “it remains a unique weapon; no other country possesses anything of the kind.” He described the aircraft as “the world’s only interceptor that can loiter for a very long time while on airspace patrol thanks to the low fuel consumption of the Aviadvigatel D30-F6 bypass turbojet, which enables the airplane to accelerate to 3,000 kilometers per hour [1,620 knots/1,864 mph] when attacking an aerial target.”

The Russian government has decided to support MiG-31 development and modernization following heated discussions in parliament and the defense ministry’s think-tank. Aviadvigatel and industrial partner Perm Motor Plant have submitted reports about the current status of the D30-F6 fleet, the equipment used to manufacture it and the supply of parts. Inozemtsev commented: “Nothing is lost. There were 1,500 engines [and 500 airframes] built. The existing MiG-31 fleet has amassed a moderate number of flying hours and their engines have a long lifetime remaining. There is a stock of engines and spares. We informed the government that we can support MiG-31 fleet operations for a long time.”

Studies by defense ministry think-tanks assert that neither the recently developed Sukhoi PAKFA fifth-generation fighter nor the Tupolev PAKDA can replace the MiG-31 for a number of vital defense roles, such as protecting Russia’s vast northern territories against attack by U.S. cruise missiles and warplanes, according to Inozemtsev. “We must carry out some work to refresh our stocks. We have submitted modernization proposals that are influencing the decisions being made. I think the MiG-31 fleet will undergo refit and modernization,” Inozemtsev said.

He declined to elaborate, citing the classified nature of MoD programs. “All I can say is that this unique weapon will be further improved. After refit, the aircraft will be employed not so much on air-defense duties and more in the interests of the Air and Space Defense [Command]. This will be possible through exploration of the high potential of the airframe and powerplant.”

Russia currently has 180 MiG-31s. The aircraft first flew in 1976, and the follow-on MiG-31M first took to the sky in 1985. The MiG-31D appeared in 1987 and demonstrated its ability to fly at Mach 2.83 with six long-range air-to-air missiles on a typical 3.5-hour intercept mission. During a trial in 1994 a developmental MiG-31 destroyed a low-flying target from a distance of 162 nm (300 km).

The most recent variant, the MiG-31BM, is a multirole aircraft with the redeveloped Zaslon-M passive phased-array radar, capable of detecting up to 10 targets simultaneously at a range of up to 175 nm (324 km). It can employ the RVV-BD active radar-guided weapon, with a firing range of 108 nm (200 km). The MiG-31BM can also carry R-77 infrared-guided air-to-air missiles, Kh-31 air-to-surface missiles and KAB-500 EO/IR-guided bombs. The Sokol plant in Nizhny Novgorod continues to upgrade in-service aircraft to the MiG-31BM configuration at a rate of 15 aircraft per year. The facility has a Russian MoD contract for about 60 MiG-31BMs for delivery between 2011 and 2018.

On a related subject, issues were raised during parliamentary hearings on the role of United Technologies and Pratt & Whitney in “destroying” military production capability at the Perm Motor Plant. The U.S. firms had been shareholders, but after some controversy Russian government entities bought back their stock holdings “two to three years ago,” according to Inozemtsev. This has enabled Perm to sell PS90A advanced turbofans to Iran to power Tupolev Tu-204 jetliners, a move previously opposed by the U.S. State Department.
Interesting, as I was expecting that the PAK FA would replace the MiG-31. With high speed and plenty of gas, I would've thought that the T-50 would render the MiG-31 redundant.
 

Sundog

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Aug 2, 2006
Messages
2,670
Reaction score
110
RadicalDisco said:
Interesting, as I was expecting that the PAK FA would replace the MiG-31. With high speed and plenty of gas, I would've thought that the T-50 would render the MiG-31 redundant.
The PAK-FA is much too small to replace the MiG-31. It can't even come close to performing the MiG-31's mission as the range requirement demands a large airframe to carry the required fuel amount.
 
R

Radical

Guest
Sundog said:
RadicalDisco said:
Interesting, as I was expecting that the PAK FA would replace the MiG-31. With high speed and plenty of gas, I would've thought that the T-50 would render the MiG-31 redundant.
The PAK-FA is much too small to replace the MiG-31. It can't even come close to performing the MiG-31's mission as the range requirement demands a large airframe to carry the required fuel amount.
Interesting. Though IIRC, the subsonic range of the T-50 and MiG-31 are roughly the same at around 3,300 km (3,500 km for T-50). That said, the T-50 probably carries quite a bit less fuel that the MiG.
 

totoro

CLEARANCE: Secret
Joined
Jan 11, 2011
Messages
308
Reaction score
28
Website
www.youtube.com
the 3300 km figure is ferry range, not combat radius. Subsonic combat radius for mig31 is typically quoted at 1450 km.
 
R

Radical

Guest
totoro said:
the 3300 km figure is ferry range, not combat radius. Subsonic combat radius for mig31 is typically quoted at 1450 km.
Sorry, I meant range, and corrected that.
 

FighterJock

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Oct 29, 2007
Messages
1,133
Reaction score
63
All MiG has to do is dust of the 701 stealthy interceptor.
 

Avimimus

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
1,938
Reaction score
38
That is a lot of dust ;D

The thing that I find most interesting - it is implied that the PAK-DA was considered as an alternative to the Mig-31 in the study... which meant that its use as a patrol platform had to be ruled out in making the argument for Mig-31 modernisation.

Both the Tupolev Tu-28/128 and the Tu-160PP have supersonic dash capability. It makes me wonder if this study considered a supersonic PAK-DA (even though the final design is reported to be subsonic) or if some kind of subsonic cruise-missile killer (like an aerial S-300 battery?) is what was dismissed? Anyway, it also reminds me of speculation about the B-1R as an airspace denial weapon and anti-ship missile interceptor, working with fighters to protect carriers from being overwhelmed.
 

sferrin

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
12,510
Reaction score
571
FighterJock said:
All MiG has to do is dust of the 701 stealthy interceptor.
I still wonder why anybody thought that thing was stealthy.
 

XP67_Moonbat

CLEARANCE: Top Secret
Joined
Jan 16, 2008
Messages
2,154
Reaction score
17
Oooh! Makes me wonder if maybe a B-1R equivalent using the Tu-160 was studied? :D
 

flateric

CLEARANCE: Above Top Secret
Staff member
Top Contributor
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2006
Messages
8,841
Reaction score
349
sure. Tu-160P (mid 70s)
 
Top