Why the Mig-31 counts?

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.
 

Avimimus

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Dec 16, 2007
Messages
2,076
Reaction score
235
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 )
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,213
Reaction score
89
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.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,473
Reaction score
3,357
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.
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,213
Reaction score
89
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.
 
A

avatar

Guest
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?
 

SOC

I look at pictures all day
Senior Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Messages
1,213
Reaction score
89
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.
 

haavarla

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
142
Reaction score
169
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?
 

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
1,383
Reaction score
1,552
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).
 

haavarla

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
142
Reaction score
169
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:

DWG

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Feb 11, 2007
Messages
1,383
Reaction score
1,552
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.

 

eagle

ACCESS: Restricted
Joined
Apr 7, 2009
Messages
35
Reaction score
46
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
 

TMA1

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
108
Reaction score
161
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.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,473
Reaction score
3,357
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.
 

Anduriel

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Mar 4, 2020
Messages
90
Reaction score
142
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.
 

flanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
910
Reaction score
167
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.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,473
Reaction score
3,357
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:
 

TomS

ACCESS: Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Apr 16, 2008
Messages
4,880
Reaction score
2,394
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?
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,473
Reaction score
3,357
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.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
6,663
Reaction score
5,424
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:

haavarla

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Jun 29, 2010
Messages
142
Reaction score
169
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.
 

Archibald

ACCESS: Above Top Secret
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 6, 2006
Messages
6,663
Reaction score
5,424
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...
 

GARGEAN

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
May 7, 2018
Messages
703
Reaction score
433
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
 

TMA1

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
108
Reaction score
161
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.
 

Ronny

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Jul 20, 2019
Messages
546
Reaction score
333
About the Mig-31K
One thing has been bugging me though
Since it has to carry Kinzhal, it is understand able that they have to remove the R-37 APU in the fuselage for the Kinzhal launcher, but then again, it still has space under the wing right?. Why also remove the option of carry air to air missile there?.
6CBCAC2D-53CF-4198-A41D-C89D23A5B2D4.jpeg
 

flanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
910
Reaction score
167
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:
Well, that would be the extent and the depth of the analysis i would expect from you indeed. Did you type such an excellent hot take with a hamburger or AR-15 or both? :)
 
Last edited:

flanker

ACCESS: Top Secret
Joined
Mar 20, 2008
Messages
910
Reaction score
167
About the Mig-31K
One thing has been bugging me though
Since it has to carry Kinzhal, it is understand able that they have to remove the R-37 APU in the fuselage for the Kinzhal launcher, but then again, it still has space under the wing right?. Why also remove the option of carry air to air missile there?.
Technically AKU and for R-33. Yes, AKU's for R-33's are completely gone as are the hardpoints for pylons. IRST is gone too. The reasons it doesnt carry self defense weapons is the same reason Tu-160 isnt armed with self defense - what is the need when you can literally fire your missile(s) from thousands of km's away from any air defense? Weight and range were the bigger factors than any "need" for self defense capabilities.
 

TMA1

ACCESS: Confidential
Joined
Feb 6, 2021
Messages
108
Reaction score
161
This might have been answered earlier just couldn't find it. Are they using older airframes that had not been upgraded to the BM standard? That would make sense as I believe they still have some airframes in storage and they recently resumed building the engines for the mig 31.
 

sferrin

ACCESS: USAP
Senior Member
Joined
Jun 3, 2011
Messages
14,473
Reaction score
3,357
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:
Well, that would be the extent and the depth of the analysis i would expect from you indeed. Did you type such an excellent hot take with a hamburger or AR-15 or both? :)
A burger in one hand and an AR in the other. My point still stands.
 

Similar threads

Top