MiG 41

[GGTharos]

So, it's probable that they'll find a way to find the B-2 with the radar from a considerable distance.

 

No, it isn't ...

 

Also, the B-2's have to get through the vast SAM network Russia has.

 

Because this is what it was made for.

[tomcatter]

The tanker obiously will not escort nobody, that´s for sure.

 

Anyway in a B2 mission you will need a good force of tankers going up and down to let the bat reach his target.

 

And to some expert eyes and ears, that alone can be a track to at least be alerted on what is going on over your head and be prepared.

 

I´m not an expert on the subject, but my bet is that escorting a stealth fighter with SEAD or fighters mission is not the most clever thing to do.

[Drona]

No, it isn't ...

Because this is what it was made for.

 

It maybe made for that but whether it succeeds or not is a different matter.

[GGTharos]

Yes, whether it succeeds or not is a different matter. That you won't detect it at anything resembling 'long range' is however the factual point.

 

Anyway I digress. Like I said, this MiG-41 thing is a similar idea to the USAF's research into newer and faster aircraft. Nothing surprising there.

 

It maybe made for that but whether it succeeds or not is a different matter.

[GGTharos]

Depends on the defense. The effect of stealth is to make an aircraft detectable at about 1/10th the distance a similar aircraft would be detected. So, if you have a radar that'll pick up a fighter at 150km, you'll pick up a stealth plane at maybe 15km (it's not exactly linear, so the distances are likely to be a bit more, rather than less).

 

What if you have radars 15km apart? You can't cover an entire country like this, but you certainly can cover some assets like that. So, SEAD in this case could be used to suppress one or two parts of the IADS long enough to make a hole for the stealth aircraft to sneak through.

 

Now, if we're talking about a stealth MiG-41, then you probably don't any SEAD at all :D

 

I´m not an expert on the subject, but my bet is that escorting a stealth fighter with SEAD or fighters mission is not the most clever thing to do.

[Drona]

That you won't detect it at anything resembling 'long range' is however the factual point.

 

Well, I think otherwise..it's not impossible.

[tomcatter]

What if you have radars 15km apart? You can't cover an entire country like this, but you certainly can cover some assets like that. So, SEAD in this case could be used to suppress one or two parts of the IADS long enough to make a hole for the stealth aircraft to sneak through.

 

I get the argument, and i see it as a valid strategy, but....

 

What i don´t get is: i imagine that the purpose of a stealth attack is to get there without been seen, attack and denied the response.

 

I think this will be hard to archive with a conventional package making an attack before the B2, maybe i´m wrong

[NoJoe]

I get the argument, and i see it as a valid strategy, but....

 

What i don´t get is: i imagine that the purpose of a stealth attack is to get there without been seen, attack and denied the response.

 

I think this will be hard to archive with a conventional package making an attack before the B2, maybe i´m wrong

 

I'd imagine the conventional package would serve as quite a distraction, busy enough to help the stealthy bats slip through.

[NineLine]

Guys, can we steer back towards the MiG 41, I would love to discuss stealth strategies and such, but make another thread for it.

[OutOnTheOP]

MiG 31 has been an aircraft in its own class. It might be that the MiG 41 will establish yet another untouchable class.

 

A class of it's own? *lol* What class is that, "huge engines with wings taped on as an afterthought"? Cut the hubris; there's nothing inherently special about the MiG-25/31 that put it "in a class of it's own". There were plenty of other aircraft capable of attaining those speeds. And as I recall, SR71, capable of the same speeds and altitudes (and sustaining them much longer!) had an interceptor variant.

 

We know you have an unwavering love of anything Soviet, and irrational hatred of anything American, but seriously, try to be objective from time to time?

[Kuky]

A class of it's own? *lol* What class is that, "huge engines with wings taped on as an afterthought"? Cut the hubris; there's nothing inherently special about the MiG-25/31 that put it "in a class of it's own". There were plenty of other aircraft capable of attaining those speeds. And as I recall, SR71, capable of the same speeds and altitudes (and sustaining them much longer!) had an interceptor variant.

 

We know you have an unwavering love of anything Soviet, and irrational hatred of anything American, but seriously, try to be objective from time to time?

 

Well the F-14 was the only American aircraft that could engage the targets at long range like the MiG-31 as both have very powerful radar and very long range missiles, but the MiG-31 can fly way faster and way higher so I'm afraid it outclassed anything American. The MiG-31 is only no dogfighter. And Sr-71 was no interceptor, it was recon plane so not in same category with MiG-31.

Edited March 8, 2014 by Kuky

[wilky510]

I'm afraid it outclassed anything American.

^ These posts are my favorite, While the Russian bias is quite big on these forums. It just shows more and more these days keep underestimating American aircraft. Which is a good thing. :smilewink:

[Kuky]

^ These posts are my favorite, While the Russian bias is quite big on these forums. It just shows more and more these days keep underestimating American aircraft. Which is a good thing. :smilewink:

 

Don't make me laugh... exactly where am I underestimating anything? What aircraft in US inventory can intercept at long range like MiG-31, fly as high as MiG-31 and fast as MiG-31? Well? It's more like the person I quoted has done that and now you are doing it also :music_whistling: And FYI, it works both ways :smilewink:

 

PS: I read earlier accounts of MiG-31 intercepting Sr-71 twice... first time it locked the Sr-71 at 120km range while it was at 55,000ft and waited if it will cross into Russian airspace, in which case it would shoot, but Sr-71 didn't. Second time 4x MiG-31's intercepted it from different directions, again Sr-71 had to abort... after that it no longer flew over Russia. The F-14 could intercept it also, why I said it's closest to MiG-31, but fact is F-14 is slower and can't fly as high as MiG-31... so where exactly is my bias?

Edited March 8, 2014 by Kuky

[wilky510]

so where exactly is my bias?

Because there's no need for the USAF to have a MiG-31, so why even bring up the point it "outclasses" USAF aircraft.. of course it does. They have no need for one, they didn't have Mach 3+ aircraft at 80,000 ft constantly bombarding their airspace..

 

Also, while it isn't quite as fast, nor has quite a long missile range. The F-22 flies at 60,000+ feet, 1.70+ mach without burners even in training missions.

[Kuky]

The F-22 flies at 60,000+ feet, 1.70+ mach without burners even in training missions.

 

You sure it can go that fast without afterburners? I see it quoted as Mach 2 airframe, if it can go 1.7 even without afterburners then surely it should be able to fly much faster than Mach2. So, I don't believe it can cruse that fast without afterburners.

Edited March 8, 2014 by Kuky

[karambiatos]

They have no need for one, they didn't have Mach 3+ aircraft at 80,000 ft constantly bombarding their airspace..

What?

[GGTharos]

It's already been mentioned long ago that it will reach/exceed M1.7 without afterburner (or rather, sustain it. They'll use AB to get to that speed since it's a lot faster that way).

 

Top speed is dictated by airframe heating AND engine heating. The F-15 has already been flown to M2.7, but at those speeds 'special' things need to be done to the engines to prevent them from self-destructing.

 

You sure it can go that fast without afterburners? I see it quoted as Mach 2 airframe, if it can go 1.7 even without afterburners then surely it should be able to fly much faster than Mach2. So, I don't believe it can cruse that fast without afterburners.

[wilky510]

What?

Slang. :P

 

 

You sure it can go that fast without afterburners? I see it quoted as Mach 2 airframe, if it can go 1.7 even without afterburners then surely it should be able to fly much faster than Mach2. So, I don't believe it can cruse that fast without afterburners.

While not intentional I think, the released F-22 Alaskan crash report showed alot of information about the F-22, I think that's where i saw both of those stats. The mach number might not be that high, but it was close. I also remember the picture in the report had the throttle at 60% or so too.

[Pilotasso]

Don't make me laugh... exactly where am I underestimating anything? What aircraft in US inventory can intercept at long range like MiG-31, fly as high as MiG-31 and fast as MiG-31? Well? It's more like the person I quoted has done that and now you are doing it also :music_whistling: And FYI, it works both ways :smilewink:

 

PS: I read earlier accounts of MiG-31 intercepting Sr-71 twice... first time it locked the Sr-71 at 120km range while it was at 55,000ft and waited if it will cross into Russian airspace, in which case it would shoot, but Sr-71 didn't. Second time 4x MiG-31's intercepted it from different directions, again Sr-71 had to abort... after that it no longer flew over Russia. The F-14 could intercept it also, why I said it's closest to MiG-31, but fact is F-14 is slower and can't fly as high as MiG-31... so where exactly is my bias?

 

Well the F-14 was the only American aircraft that could engage the targets at long range like the MiG-31 as both have very powerful radar and very long range missiles, but the MiG-31 can fly way faster and way higher so I'm afraid it outclassed anything American. The MiG-31 is only no dogfighter. And Sr-71 was no interceptor, it was recon plane so not in same category with MiG-31.

 

How long can the Mig-31 fly at its maximum speed? This is an interesting question regarding supercruise and ramjet missiles entering service (not to mention AIM-120C7 and D).

 

The Mig31 poses challenges to several legacy aircraft but its not an aircraft that cant be beaten by newer types.

 

I see this as early F-15's and 16's VS Mig-25 (which was even faster) and not surprisingly that didn't keep them from being shot down on several occasions.

Edited March 8, 2014 by Pilotasso

[RIPTIDE]

I think people are forgetting the primary role of the MiG-31 is airborne radar patrol over vast distances with the ability to intercept should it need to, at the time. Mach 4+? Sure. As stealth becomes more common in the next decades ahead, time to intercept will need to be shorter as stealthy targets might not be detected as soon as legacy airframes. It makes perfect sense to me. One thing I am sure of.... the architects of this upgrade know exactly what they're doing and why, notwithstanding the previous comments.

 

IN terms of the MiG-25 engagements, what we know is they were useful in the service of Iraq at wiping out Iranian C-130 and F-4 based ELINT, but... not outside Iraq's Ground Control Range.. which had limits.

[Pilotasso]

I think people are forgetting the primary role of the MiG-31 is airborne radar patrol over vast distances with the ability to intercept should it need to, at the time.

 

I have read otherwise, that it was to defend remote regions of the USSR against low flying targets.

[RIPTIDE]

I have read otherwise, that it was to defend remote regions of the USSR against low flying targets.

Can you point out where exactly what I said differs from what you have said?

[EtherealN]

I think the difference is implicit; patrol vs intercept. Basically between having planes patrolling and having planes on alert ready to take off an burn like mofos in the desired direction.

 

For me though, as long as it sounds as awesome as the 31, go MiG! :D

[EtherealN]

TOPIC: MiG 41

[Pilotasso]

Any concept art yet?