ED Team NineLine Posted March 6, 2014 ED Team Posted March 6, 2014 (edited) Based on the MiG 31? http://itar-tass.com/politika/1011697 Edited March 6, 2014 by NineLine Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
Kusch Posted March 6, 2014 Posted March 6, 2014 Please! Properly called: MiG-Mikojan-Gurewitsch, not Mig ;) 1 Give me "flying telephone pole" (SA-2)!
ED Team NineLine Posted March 6, 2014 Author ED Team Posted March 6, 2014 Please! Properly called: MiG-Mikojan-Gurewitsch, not Mig ;) A thousand apologies :P Forum Rules • My YouTube • My Discord - NineLine#0440• **How to Report a Bug**
IvanK Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 (edited) English Link: http://theaviationist.com/2014/03/05/mig-41-mig-31-replacement/ http://www.ruaviation.com/news/2014/3/5/2209/ Edited March 7, 2014 by IvanK
PFunk1606688187 Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 Mach 4.3? Is this airframe, even re-engineered, capable of this kind of performance? Warning: Nothing I say is automatically correct, even if I think it is.
Weta43 Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 Mach 4.3? Is this airframe, even re-engineered, capable of this kind of performance? Don't know, but my understanding is it's top speed was always limited by the engines - particularly wear rates on the engines, - not the airframe. Maybe just installing the new engines that will replace the current T-50 engines will do this for it ... (Before you write 4 paragraphs of irate rebuttal - Just kidding ) Cheers.
159th_Viper Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 Where Angels Fear to Tread :thumbup: Novice or Veteran looking for an alternative MP career? Click me to commence your Journey of Pillage and Plunder! [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] '....And when I get to Heaven, to St Peter I will tell.... One more Soldier reporting Sir, I've served my time in Hell......'
Pepec9124 Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 Rebuild it with composites and titanium instead of nickel steel. Upgrade engines to not fail beyond Mach 2.8. Profit ? Mach 4+ and more G load.
Boberro Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 And the purpose of this, is? Reminder: Fighter pilots make movies. Bomber pilots make... HISTORY! :D | Also to be remembered: FRENCH TANKS HAVE ONE GEAR FORWARD AND FIVE BACKWARD :D ಠ_ಠ ツ
X-man Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 And the purpose of this, is? Isn't it obvious? 64th Aggressor Squadron Discord: 64th Aggressor Squadron TS: 135.181.115.54
Exorcet Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 This sounds more like an experiment/research project to me. Mach 4 would be great to achieve but if it's visible at that speed, that might just make it easier to shoot down due to enormous closure speed. The MiG-31 isn't stealthy, stealth material doesn't like high stress, and high thermal gradients reflect radar waves. I wonder if there is more to it than speed. Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 MiG 31 has been an aircraft in its own class. It might be that the MiG 41 will establish yet another untouchable class. Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 And the purpose of this, is?Research, surveillance, combat use, maintaining technological edge, prestige ... to name few. Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
Exorcet Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 MiG 31 has been an aircraft in its own class. It might be that the MiG 41 will establish yet another untouchable class. Yes, I remember even the MiG-25 that evaded half the USAF in the Gulf War on sheer speed alone. Back then no one had stealth aircraft though, so I think it would be more difficult for this MiG to replicate that event even with such a high speed. One thing that it might be very good at is AWACS killing, flying so high and fast, missile range could be boosted immensely. It might also be a pressure against subsonic stealth bombers. Example, a B-2 strikes a target and MiG-41's already in the air are sent to the location of the strike. They get there so fast that the probable location of the B-2 is limited to a very small area, increasing the chances of its detection. However if the B-2 had escorts, they would see giant high temperature radar returns from miles away and the closure velocity would let them fire their missiles early. It's an interesting case to examine. Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files
Aginor Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 I'm not sure that it would be good against AWACS. Those tend to fly around quite far away, and IIRC Viktor Belenko wrote that the range of the MiG-25 was poor. Engines that powerful are often not very efficient, so they need lots of fuel. DCSW weapons cheat sheet speed cheat sheet
Drona Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 It might also be a pressure against subsonic stealth bombers. Example, a B-2 strikes a target and MiG-41's already in the air are sent to the location of the strike. They get there so fast that the probable location of the B-2 is limited to a very small area, increasing the chances of its detection. However if the B-2 had escorts, they would see giant high temperature radar returns from miles away and the closure velocity would let them fire their missiles early. It's an interesting case to examine. Yes, a very interesting case. Don't you think that with MiG-41's speed and probable height advantage, that its missiles will reach much faster than the B-2's escorts missiles? Not only that, the MiG's maybe carrying fire and forget missiles, so they just might fire and turn away too. Also, since this MiG is an interceptor, it might only fire on the B-2's (if they know where they are) and leave the escorts out of the fight completely. All this is wishful thinking, I know. In real life, it will be totally different. We can only theorize all this shit :music_whistling:
GGTharos Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 B-2's don't fly with escorts ... unless I suppose they're F-22's (but they'd never have the fuel to escort a B-2 on a real strategic mission anyway), and then what's a MiG-41 to do? Anyway that is a pointless discussion. This isn't much different to the USAF's forays into mach-6 aircraft research. [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Aginor Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 Yeah. They try to fly as fast as they can because... you know... they can? :D DCSW weapons cheat sheet speed cheat sheet
Exorcet Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 Yes, a very interesting case. Don't you think that with MiG-41's speed and probable height advantage, that its missiles will reach much faster than the B-2's escorts missiles? Not only that, the MiG's maybe carrying fire and forget missiles, so they just might fire and turn away too. Also, since this MiG is an interceptor, it might only fire on the B-2's (if they know where they are) and leave the escorts out of the fight completely. This is why I brought up AWACS attack before. The difference between B-2 and AWACS is supposedly detection. I'd think there wouldn't be a chance for an attack on a B-2 until you're within a few miles of one. All this is wishful thinking, I know. In real life, it will be totally different. We can only theorize all this shit :music_whistling: Yes, but still fun to do anyway. B-2's don't fly with escorts ... unless I suppose they're F-22's (but they'd never have the fuel to escort a B-2 on a real strategic mission anyway), and then what's a MiG-41 to do? It might not be a traditional escort mission. Maybe they would just rendezvous and CAP over the target, as ideally that's the only place the enemy would be aware of a B-2. Anyway that is a pointless discussion. This isn't much different to the USAF's forays into mach-6 aircraft research. There's a good chance of that, but if the MiG is really an interceptor intended for service I'm curious as to how it would work. I think if this was 30 years ago it would be a lot more threatening, but now it seems like if this was to be made it would arrive at a time where it would need advantages other than raw speed to be truly effective. Awaiting: DCS F-15C Win 10 i5-9600KF 4.6 GHz 64 GB RAM RTX2080Ti 11GB -- Win 7 64 i5-6600K 3.6 GHz 32 GB RAM GTX970 4GB -- A-10C, F-5E, Su-27, F-15C, F-14B, F-16C missions in User Files
4c Hajduk Veljko Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 B-2's don't fly with escorts ... research.You know GG, I am sure some kids here will believe everything you say, however, you do realize that there are adults on this forum as well, right? It took dozens of airplanes in the air when B-2 dropped bombs on Chinese embassy in Belgrade. There was refueling, SEAD, fighter escort, electronic countermeasure aircraft in the air for B-2 to do that job. That single B-2 mission, I assume, was in the price range of tens of thousands of dollars, or maybe even over a $100K. I am positive that there is no military planner in the world that would send B-2 out without escort, so that MiG-21 can kill it with couple of R-50's ... Reminder: SAM = Stealth STOP! Thermaltake Kandalf LCS | Gigabyte GA-X58A-UD3R | Etasis ET750 (850W Max) | i7-920 OC to 4.0 GHz | Gigabyte HD5850 | OCZ Gold 6GB DDR3 2000 | 2 X 30GB OCZ Vertex SSD in RAID 0 | ASUS VW266H 25.5" | LG Blue Ray 10X burner | TIR 5 | Saitek X-52 Pro | Logitech G930 | Saitek Pro flight rudder pedals | Windows 7 Home Premium 64 bit
GGTharos Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 I'm positive that you don't know what you're talking about. I don't see how SEAD/Refueling/Fighters could even hope to escort the B-2 on it's strategic mission, which the action over belgrade was not. I am positive that there is no military planner in the world that would send B-2 out without escort, so that MiG-21 can kill it with couple of R-50's ... [sIGPIC][/sIGPIC] Reminder: SAM = Speed Bump :D I used to play flight sims like you, but then I took a slammer to the knee - Yoda
Drona Posted March 7, 2014 Posted March 7, 2014 This is why I brought up AWACS attack before. The difference between B-2 and AWACS is supposedly detection. I'd think there wouldn't be a chance for an attack on a B-2 until you're within a few miles of one. Yes, but the question is "how many miles" is a "few miles". That will differ from person to person. Look at the MiG-31, it had the most sophisticated radar of its time and I'm pretty sure those ruskies will have something similar for this day and age or the future. So, it's probable that they'll find a way to find the B-2 with the radar from a considerable distance. Also, the B-2's have to get through the vast SAM network Russia has. If the B-2's are going to fly without escorts as GG says, better still!!!! :thumbup: Yes, but still fun to do anyway. Agreed!
Recommended Posts