MiG-41: There is no defense against a crowbar

Ace Combat Image

MiG-41, also known as the promising one aviation long-range interception complex (PAK DP) - in open sources on the Internet there are many versions of what this combat vehicle will look like. The range of assumptions starts from the fact that the MiG-41 program has long been curtailed, to the development of some kind of aerospace fighter capable of entering Earth orbit.

Today we will not talk about promising developments that may appear in the distant or medium term - ramjet or detonation engines, radio-optical phased antenna arrays (ROFAR), hypersonic speeds and orbital entry, but we will focus on what the existing and expected capabilities of our industry, in particular RSK MiG as a company inheriting the traditions of the A. I. Mikoyan Design Bureau, allow us to implement.

Why RSC MiG?

At least because the MiG-31 was created by the A. I. Mikoyan Design Bureau, and in terms of the PAK DP, all open sources say that the promising long-range interceptor is being developed by the RSC MiG company. In addition, the author would very much like for our country to have internal competition in the matter of creating tactical combat aviation, at least between two design bureaus.

The proposed appearance of the PAK DP of the RSC MiG company, Project 701 with a takeoff weight of about 70 tons

On the other hand, the situation with the MiG-35, which, apparently, was not in demand, requires considering the option that RSK MiG will no longer be able to “pull” the MiG-41 in any capacity, so it is possible that the “successor” to the MiG-31, if it appears at all, will be made by JSC Sukhoi Company, however, this is a topic for a separate conversation.

In the previous article From MiG-31 to MiG-41: goals and objectives of a promising combat vehicle We talked about the fact that for the promising multifunctional fighter-interceptor MiG-41 there are a number of tasks that may be beyond the capabilities of such combat vehicles as the multifunctional heavy fighter of the fifth generation Su-57 and the promising multifunctional light fighter Su-75.

Render of the Su-75. Image – Rostec State Corporation press service

The MiG-41 can presumably solve the following tasks:

- destruction of high-altitude supersonic and hypersonic, manned and unmanned reconnaissance and strike systems;

- interception of hypersonic missiles from combat alert mode in the air;

- destruction at long and ultra-long range of particularly important air targets, such as airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, refueling aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, and strategic bombers;

- use of anti-satellite weapons and delivery of payload to low Earth orbit (LEO);

- use as a first stage for launching existing and future hypersonic missiles.

Another important factor in the creation of the PAK DP is time.

How much longer can MiG-31 aircraft continue to serve? According to open data on the Internet, the service life of the MiG-31 airframe can be extended to a maximum of 40 years, and given that this aircraft was taken out of production in 1994, all MiG-2034 aircraft should be decommissioned in 31.

Which aviation complex, after the end of the MiG-31 operation, will launch the hypersonic missiles of the Kinzhal complex? Or will it be used to intercept high-speed targets? And for launching air-launched anti-satellite weapons, if the creation of such weapons is completed?

So it turns out that a replacement for the MiG-31 is needed as soon as possible, with the first flight tentatively in 2030 and serial production no later than 2035.

In this article we will consider two variants of the implementation of the multifunctional fighter-interceptor MiG-41, we will call them - basic and advanced, while we will take into account the above-mentioned tasks that it must solve.

The main structural elements of a combat aircraft include:

- glider – fuselage, wings, control surfaces;
- engines – turbojet engines (TRD);
- on-board radio-electronic equipment (avionics).

Strictly speaking, in our version, the MiG-41 is not quite a PAK DP, but rather a multifunctional high-altitude supersonic fighter-interceptor. (yes, almost all tactical combat aircraft are now supersonic, but most of them are capable of going supersonic only for a short time and not for much).

Planer

In the basic version, we start from the airframe of the MiG-25 and MiG-31 aircraft line.

Some may call this a deep modernization of the MiG-31, and perhaps they will be partly right in some ways, but given the volume of proposed modifications, as well as the fact that the aircraft will have to be produced anew, it will in fact be a new combat aircraft.

Yes, this may seem like a step backwards to some, but it is appropriate to recall the American F-15EX. Despite the presence of fifth-generation F-35 fighters in service, being built in huge batches (by modern standards), as well as ongoing work on a sixth-generation fighter, the US Air Force simply went and ordered the newest, most advanced version of the F-15 fighter, which made its first flight back in 1972.

And they clearly don't suffer from self-reflection about what anyone might think. Incidentally, the MiG-25 made its first flight in 1964 – eight years before the F-15, and the MiG-31 first took to the air in 1975.

The F-15 fighter is not much older than the MiG-25, but in a deeply modernized version, the F-15EX is mass-produced for the US Air Force.

There will be no hypersonics or space travel, stealth or super maneuverability (It's strange that anyone would even talk about super-maneuverability in relation to a machine like the PAK DP), but within the framework of the previously outlined tasks, all this is not required.

Why not just upgrade the existing MiG-31 aircraft then?

Because, as we have already said above, in five to ten years the MiG-31 airframes will exhaust their service life and be decommissioned.

It makes no sense to simply restore the production of airframes - during this time, production technologies have changed significantly, other machines and tooling will be used, in addition, given the expected tasks of the MiG-41, the requirements for the airframe will also change - it must be optimized for operation at maximum speeds and at high altitudes. That is, in fact, the airframe of the basic version of the MiG-41 will be closer to the airframe of the original MiG-25 aircraft, of course, taking into account the latest achievements in aerodynamics and the emergence of new structural materials.

MiG-25PU, on which test pilot Alexander Vasilyevich Fedotov set an absolute world altitude record on August 21, 1977 – 37 meters

Some element of the airframe may be made of a modern alloy or other material that can withstand extremely high temperatures, for example, something from the developments implemented during the Energia-Buran program, somewhere a composite element of the structure is installed. Partial or even complete rejection of hydraulic systems in favor of powerful and high-speed electric drives is possible.

It can be assumed that the volume of design improvements during the development of the airframe of the basic version of the MiG-41 will be comparable to what was once carried out during the development of the MiG-31 airframe, based on the MiG-25 airframe.

The airframe of the advanced version of the MiG-41 may be based on the latest known developments of the MiG company.

And here we also have few options.

In February 2000, the prototype MiG-1.44, developed under the MiG-1.42 fifth-generation fighter program, made its first flight. The MiG-1.42/1.44 program was subsequently curtailed, and the Su-57 heavy multirole fighter became the main fifth-generation aircraft in Russia, and it is possible that in the future it will be supplemented by the Su-75 light fighter.

MiG-1.42/1.44

The MiG-1.42/1.44 project used a canard aerodynamic configuration with a canard. This aerodynamic configuration has recently become popular – the French Dassault Rafale, the pan-European Eurofighter Typhoon, the Chinese Chengdu J-20. There is a possibility that even the promising American sixth-generation fighter Boeing F-47 will be made using the canard configuration.

Chengdu J-20 (left) and Boeing F-47 (right)

Open sources mention that the promising multifunctional fighter MiG-1.42/1.44, according to one of the designers, was an “evolved MiG-25” – a high-speed fighter that had “grown up” to a qualitatively new level.

Thus, the advanced version of the MiG-41 may well use the groundwork created during the development of the MiG-1.42/1.44.

Compared to the original design, it will be larger in size and optimized for high-speed flight rather than aerobatic maneuvers. As with the MiG-25/MiG-31 airframe, the design must be highly durable and resistant to high temperatures.

Engine

For the basic version, the option of restoring production of the existing D-30F6 turbojet engines, which are part of the MiG-31, but in a modernized version, can be considered.

In particular, a certain conventional D-30F6M turbojet engine can be modified to include a modern plasma ignition system, a full authority digital control system (FADEC), new single-crystal turbine blades capable of withstanding high temperatures, and the like.

It is possible that the potential for upgrading the D-30F6 turbojet engine is far from exhausted

If the existing D-30F6 turbojet engine produces about 15,5 thousand kgf of thrust in afterburner, then from the modernized D-30F6M turbojet engine one can quite easily expect figures at the level of 17-18 thousand kgf.

Accordingly, if we are considering an advanced version of the MiG-41, then it may use “product 20” – the AL-41F turbojet engine, developed within the framework of the MiG-1.42/1.44 project.

The AL-41F engine should not be confused with the AL-41F1 turbojet engine, developed on the basis of the AL-31F turbojet engine, as the first stage engine for the Su-57, since the original AL-41F turbojet engine did not fit into the Su-57 in terms of dimensions. The AL-41F turbojet engine should easily fit not only into the advanced version of the MiG-41, but also into the basic version, created on the basis of the modernized MiG-31 airframe, since the prototype of this aircraft engine was tested on the MiG-25 flying laboratory (side 306) with a similar size of engine nacelles.

The maximum speed of the fighter based on the MiG-1.42/1.44 project was to be 2,6 Mach or about 3000 kilometers per hour, which is already close to the speed indicators of the MiG-31, although it is unclear how long this aircraft could maintain it with afterburner. By the way, the MiG-1.42/1.44 prototypes were equipped with heat-resistant glazing of a yellowish tint, which also indirectly indicates that this machine was supposed to be used at high speeds.

Item 20 – AL-41F turbojet engine. Image by @HEMemarian

According to open sources, the AL-41F turbojet engine had a thrust of about 18 thousand kgf back in 2010, and it was assumed that it would ultimately be 21 thousand kgf – it is possible that with the use of modern solutions this parameter can not only be achieved, but also exceeded.

Another option is the "product-30" or the AL-51F turbojet engine, which is being developed for the Su-57 fifth-generation fighter, and most likely for the Su-75. By 2030, the AL-51F turbojet engine will most likely be in serial production. The question here will rather be the ability of our industry to manufacture the required number of these aircraft engines; it is possible that the MiG-41 simply "will not have enough."

We can also recall the R579-300 turbojet engine developed by the Soyuz Scientific and Technical Complex – we previously talked about it in the materials Soviet legacy: fifth generation turbojet engine based on Product 79 и The heart of the aircraft: aircraft engine and technical solutions capable of bringing the promising Russian VTOL aircraft to a new level.

On the one hand, this aircraft engine was supposed to have outstanding characteristics and was considered for equipping fifth-generation fighters, on the other hand, at present there is no information about the continuation of its development, the website of the AMSTK Soyuz openly states that they currently have no relation to the defense industry.

All variants of the MiG-41 turbojet engine will most likely have a nozzle without thrust vector control mechanisms (TVC) – there is no point in wasting resources and increasing the weight of an aircraft that was not originally designed for active maneuvering.

Avionics

The basis of the combat aircraft's avionics is the radar complex (RLK). The RLK for the MiG-41 in any version will most likely be developed anew, after all, the passive phased antenna array (PPAA) technology is already outdated, the confident present and near future are for active phased antenna arrays (APAA) in the CAR (digital antenna array) version or simply DAFA.

Despite the fact that the MiG-41 radar system will be developed anew, it could potentially be based on the Belka radar system, developed for the Su-57 fifth-generation fighter, which in five years will most likely already be well-mastered in production and free of its “childhood” shortcomings.

The larger size of the MiG-41 nose cone, based on the MiG-31 fuselage, will increase the number of transmitting and receiving elements (TRE) by 1,5-2,4 times, which will accordingly increase the efficiency of the radar system as a whole. That is, if the radar canvas of the N0 Belka includes 6 TREs with an antenna size of 1526x700 mm, then the canvas of the prospective MiG-900 radar can include about 41 TREs with an antenna diameter of 2302 mm and about 1100 TREs with an antenna diameter of 3729 mm.

AFAR canvas of the prototype radar N0 "Belka". Image by Allocer

The dimensions of the nose cone of the MiG-41, based on the MiG-1.42/1.44 airframe, are unknown to the author; in addition, they may change during the process of redesigning the airframe for the MiG-41's tasks, so we will conditionally accept them as the same as for the basic version of the MiG-41.

Considering that the basic Belka radar must detect targets with an effective dispersion surface of 1 m² at a range of up to 400 kilometers, it can be assumed that the promising MiG-41 radar system will be able to detect large targets made without the use of low-visibility technologies, such as AWACS aircraft, refueling aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, as well as strategic bombers, at a range of about 1000 kilometers.

Separately, it is necessary to mention the necessity of installing a highly effective optical-electronic station (OES) on the MiG-41. The enemy can and will reduce the radar visibility of prospective supersonic and hypersonic air attack weapons, but it is practically impossible to hide the airframe and the plume of powerful engines heated by the atmosphere, so that the OES will often be even more important for the MiG-41 than the radar.

Highly efficient OES could become one of the most important elements of the MiG-41

Estimated performance characteristics

Estimated tactical and technical characteristics (TTC) of the MiG-41:

- maximum flight speed with afterburner in the range of 3-4 Mach or 3500-4500 kilometers per hour;

- cruising supersonic speed without using afterburner is about 1,5-2 Mach;

- practical ceiling of about 25 kilometers and dynamic ceiling of about 35 kilometers;

- flight range in the range of 3000-4000 kilometers at subsonic speed at high altitude;

- two turbojet engines with a thrust of 18-21 thousand kgf each;

- a load capacity of about 8-12 tons, with the ability to place a large-sized massive single-cargo under the fuselage (anti-satellite missile or hypersonic air-to-ground missile) or two massive cargo under the wings, on pylons closest to the fuselage (ultra-long-range air-to-air missiles);

- maximum take-off weight is about 40-45 tons;

- the detection range of a target such as an “AEW and CAS aircraft” or a transport aircraft using a radar is about 1000 kilometers, and a target such as a “4th generation fighter” is about 500-600 kilometers;

- expected production series – 100-150 units.

Conclusions

Surely, some research work is being carried out in Russian design bureaus to create a PAK DP in the form that is fantasized about on the Internet - with detonation engines, with hypersonic flight speed, low-noise, with the ability to almost go into near space.

The question is, when could such a machine be created? First flight in 2040? Or in 2050?

By 2035, we need to fill the niche that will become vacant after the end of the MiG-31's service life, since there is nothing else to solve a number of the tasks that this machine can solve.

The considered options for creating the MiG-41 on the basis of the existing MiG-31 interceptor fighter and the groundwork left after the development of the MiG-1.42/1.44 project are quite capable of solving the problems of destroying high-altitude supersonic and hypersonic targets, destroying especially important air targets at long and ultra-long ranges, using anti-satellite weapons and launching hypersonic air-to-ground missiles.

The promising MiG-41 long-range interception aircraft complex, based on the MiG-25/31 and the MiG-1.42/1.44 project, is an opportunity to relatively simply and quickly fill the niche that will form after the “departure” of the MiG-31.

This MiG-41 is not about stealth and super-maneuverability, not about network-centricity and loyal wingmen, no - it is a highly specialized means for solving a specific list of tasks that we have considered earlier. As they say, "The rhinoceros has poor eyesight, but given its size and weight, this is a problem for those around it».

Now, when a MiG-31 takes off, an air raid alarm is announced all over Ukraine. The same thing should happen when a MiG-41 takes off, only not only ground targets will "run away", but also air ones. This should be the same crowbar against which there is no reception, and it does not matter what century's technology it is based on - a crowbar is a crowbar.

Paint it radical black - it will be cooler...

Comments

[ism_ek]

Before spending billions on a new aircraft, let's develop an effective means against enemy air defenses.
The fourth year of the war, and our aviation still hasn't flown over the LBS. The enemy's air defense shoots down planes over the Sea of ​​Azov.
I'm afraid that the time of big and beautiful airplanes is gone forever.

[Neutral Neutral]

Ukraine's air defense has been largely knocked out: this is evident from the steady growth in the number of "location-lost" missiles and drones over Ukraine. And the Ukrainian authorities themselves acknowledge the problem.

[novel66]

So, aviation can already operate in the skies of Ukraine?

[alexoff]

How can you check this? After all, aviation works on the principle of "just in case", what if there is a patriot under every bush? There is no reconnaissance to find out! But the geraniums somehow reach their targets. Maybe in some areas there is no air defense at all, because aviation does not fly and there is nothing to fear

[Orange Bigg]

According to open sources, the AL-41F turbojet engine had a thrust of about 18 thousand kgf back in 2010, and it was assumed that it would ultimately be 21 thousand kgf – it is possible that with the use of modern solutions this parameter can not only be achieved, but also exceeded.

Where do these numbers come from? The AL-41F turbojet engine, which was used to fly the MiG-1.44 in 2000. However, its dimensions did not allow it to be placed on the Su-57 fighter. The AL-41F41 turbojet engine of reduced dimensions was created on the basis of the AL-1F, the thrust of which was reduced from 18000 kgf to 15000 kgf, which is already considered insufficient for a fifth-generation fighter.

AL-41F-1S (product 117S) is a two-shaft, dual-circuit turbojet engine of modular design with controlled thrust vector and digital complex regulator. It is installed on Su-35 type aircraft. Improved engine performance is achieved by using a new low-pressure compressor with increased air flow and efficiency, as well as a new turbine with a more efficient blade cooling system.

Key Features:

thrust in special mode: 14500 kgf;
thrust in full boosted combat mode: 14000 kgf;
thrust at maximum combat mode: 8800±2% kgf;
specific fuel consumption in mode: ≤1,78+0,04 kg/kgf h;
specific fuel consumption at maximum combat mode: ≤0,77+0,02 kg/kgf h;
gas temperature before turbine: 1745 °K;
length: 4,942 m;
compressor inlet diameter: 0,932 m;
dry weight: ≤1604+2% kg.

By 2030, the AL-51F turbojet engine will most likely be in serial production.

AL-51F is already in production.

The Su-57 entered service in 2020, and production has grown rapidly since then. The aircraft is currently powered by the AL-41F-1 engine, a variant of the AL-41F-1S that currently powers the Su-35 4++ generation fighters. According to Russian state media reports from 2021, fighters with the new AL-51F-1 and a number of other improvements were originally expected to replace the original model in production in 2025, although it remains unclear whether this schedule has been affected by disruptions in Russian industry. The improved version of the fighter will be called the Su-57M.

https://inosmi.ru/20241213/su-57m-271155625.html

[victor50]

Quote from Neutral Neutral

Ukraine's air defense has been largely knocked out: this is evident from the steady growth in the number of "location-lost" missiles and drones over Ukraine. And the Ukrainian authorities themselves acknowledge the problem.

And our planes appear over any point of Ukraine practically without enemy influence? And we have no problems with the use of aviation. And everything that ism_ek (Ilya) wrote above is not true?!

[megadeth]

Why don't we get involved in orbital weapons, from carriers to ammunition, no matter how funny and fantastic it may sound... That's where the prospects are, IMHO

[Okko777]

The words "we can", "we will", "soon", "being developed" have become key in the construction of not only civil aviation, but also partially in military aviation... How many Su-34 and Su-35, Su-57 do we have? And how many of this pittance can we use in the Air Defense Forces? It's not funny. And I forgot that we are in 2nd place in the world in military aviation! Do you believe it?

[bayard]

Quote: Okko777

How many Su-34 and Su-35, Su-57 do we have?

Don't you know that information about the number of aircraft entering the troops, as well as about losses in the first phase of the Air Defense Forces, is classified? Judging by the rate of delivery and previously announced plans, by the end of this year there should already be almost 34 Su-200s or a small amount of this without taking into account losses in the first phase. The Su-35S is a little less, but is also approaching. The Su-30SM/SM2 is somewhere around one and a half hundred. But deliveries continue and the rate of delivery has increased, this year they should issue up to 30 units of each type. There are about 57 Su-50s today, about 70 are expected by the end of the year. The Su-27SM3 and Su-24M remain in service, the regiments are planned to be rearmed with Su-35S and Su-34s. In the fall of 2022, it was announced that it was intended to form 8 new air regiments, in addition to rearming the existing ones. Perhaps a decision will be made to complete the current two-squadron regiments into three-squadron ones. But yes, the effective budget spenders almost completely stopped purchasing new aircraft before the SVO. The guarantor of all good things told the aircraft manufacturers in Komsomolsk about this - supposedly "we have enough, and you see for yourselves, whether to produce Kastrbli there or something else, but we don't need more." Well, the administration immediately cut the staff, people left the industry, many found work, and then - oops ... aircraft were needed again. Even before the SVO. But there was no one to build them. The guarantor left an order for 8 aircraft per year, so that they wouldn't go under completely. And then - come on again! Give us aircraft!! But there was no one. Again they had to recruit and prepare. Because of this, among other things, the Su-57 could not be launched into series. Not only did they disperse us at first, but they also didn't want to pay us normally - Shoyga and Shevtsova with their choreographed show of twisting arms with prices and forcing people to take out loans from commercial banks... Great "geniuses" rule this wonderful country. Geostrategists and grandmasters, the best ministers and bankers-capitalists in the world. Now they've been fighting for the fourth year. They'll probably win. Gref will definitely beat everyone - he's had the biggest profit for years - not cursed, not crumpled, without lifting a finger to do anything useful, he earned more than the oil and gas workers. Apparently now he's a national treasure in the Russian Federation.

Quote: Okko777

And I forgot that we are in 2nd place in the world in military aviation!

In terms of overall numbers, China has already pushed us aside. But since we have strategic/long-range aviation, and China does not, we are still in second place. For now, and nominally.
They've been writing about the fantastic MiG-41 spacecraft for 10 years now, if not more, but I've never read such nonsense. Especially about the radar that can see AWACS at 1000 km. It touched me. And most importantly, no one can clearly answer - why do we need this Mach 4 high-altitude interceptor. About the fact that it will intercept hypersonic missiles was "strong", but this is already a clinic.

Quote: Okko777

Do you believe in this?

How can one not believe in a bright capitalist future? After all, we essentially already have one foot in Paradise.

[Gregory Charnota]

I think that there are moles in the Russian Ministry of Defense, NATO intelligence, because as soon as something starts to take off, it becomes known to the SBU

[Denis812]

Quote: Gregory Charnota

I think that there are moles in the Russian Ministry of Defense, NATO intelligence, because as soon as something starts to take off, it becomes known to the SBU

because there are satellites hanging over the territory of the Russian Federation. And as soon as something starts to take off in some Olenya, then in five minutes this, of course, becomes known to the USA, then to all of NATO, then to Ukraine.
That is, the planes have not yet set out on a combat course, but they are already being awaited and the maneuvering groups of the Ukrainian Air Defense Forces are preparing to move in accordance with what they will be told a little later.

[MBRSS]

I'm afraid that the time of big and beautiful airplanes is gone forever.

And not only planes. Tanks, ships - everything has become "brushwood of war". Unmanned freaks are gaining the upper hand on the battlefields and seas.

[Belisarius]

I remember stories about the MiG-41 from 3, 5 and 7 years ago. For example, here is an article from 2018 - "The new MiG-41 interceptor fighter will be able to perform tasks in space" https://rg.ru/2018/08/17/novyj-istrebitel-perehvatchik-mig-41-smozhet-vypolniat-zadachi-v-kosmose.html?utm_referrer=https%3A%2F%2Fru.wikipedia.org%2F
Well, of course - money is being made, suckers are getting scammed, strange people are discussing technical details, and nothing has changed...

[Orange Bigg]

If the existing D-30F6 turbojet engine produces about 15,5 thousand kgf of thrust in afterburner, then from the modernized D-30F6M turbojet engine one can quite expect indicators at the level of 17-18 thousand kgf.

The numbers there are slightly different. The thrust of the engine there is similar to the engine currently installed on the F-35.

. The improved and more fuel-efficient D-30F-6M engine, developed for the MiG-31M, was much more fuel-efficient and 28% more powerful than its predecessor. Its thrust reached 195 kN. Such engines allowed the MiG-31 to fly even faster and higher, as well as carry a fairly impressive missile arsenal of six long-range R-37 missiles and several smaller missiles. As Military Watch experts note, the collapse of the Soviet Union and the economic crisis prevented the launch of serial production of the MiG-31M interceptor. The interceptor and its engine were ready for production back in 1994.

https://overclockers.ru/blog/vokrugsveta/show/147897/Eksperty-Military-Watch-sostavili-rejting-samyh-moschnyh-dvigatelej-sozdannyh-dlya-istrebitelej

The MiG-31M interceptor prototype. Photo source: militarywatchmagazine.com

Today we will not talk about promising developments that may appear in the distant or medium term – ramjet or detonation engines, radio-optical phased antenna arrays (ROFAR)

ROFAR was promised to be installed on the Su-57M.

"The active antenna array with a high-speed scanning system created within the framework of the project is built on the basis of distributed radio-photonic transceiver modules, which use an original domestic component base. Based on the results of testing the demonstrator created by the concern, we obtained results that allow us to talk about the prospects for using ROFAR as part of the latest marine, aviation and space technology, including in radar surveillance systems," said Vyacheslav Mikheev, General Director of the Vega concern.

https://avia.pro/news/koncern-vega-zavershil-ispytaniya-prototipa-rofar

[Orange Bigg]

Continuing with the post. ROFAR has been under development since 2014. Even then, information on this topic was in open sources.

"At the end of our work on ROFAR, we will receive a full list of aircraft - manned and unmanned - which we plan to propose equipping with radars based on radio-optical phased antenna arrays. I think that the PAK FA will also be on this list and certain proposals will be issued on it," RIA Novosti quotes Vladimir Mikheev, adviser to the first deputy general director of the Radio-Electronic Technologies concern. He noted that the final decision will be made by the Russian Defense Ministry.
"ROFAR will allow us to see an aircraft located 500 kilometers away, as if we were standing 50 meters away at the airfield, its portrait in the video range. Moreover, if necessary, this technology will allow us to look into the aircraft itself, to find out what people and equipment are in it, since the signal can pass through any obstacles, even meter-thick lead walls," Mikheyev said.

https://glav.su/forum/threads/1040372

"Based on the testing of the demonstrator created by the concern, we obtained results that allow us to talk about the prospects for using ROFAR as part of the latest marine, aviation and space technology, including in radar surveillance systems," said Vyacheslav Mikheev, CEO of the Vega concern, at the Army-2020 forum. He also emphasized that the new technology will allow integrating the transceiver into the skin of a ship, aircraft or satellite, as well as increasing the radar's field of view. It is also worth mentioning that ROFAR was created on the basis of an original domestic component base.

https://rg.ru/2020/08/29/v-rossii-zaversheny-ispytaniia-fotonnogo-radara-dlia-poiska-stels-celej.html

By the way, we have also tested detonation engines and even have images of them from specialized forums, they are in open media sources.

[Orange Bigg]

Continuing with the post. In the first image, the Belka AFAR is on the left, and the ROFAR is on the right. The ROFAR is good because it is immune to electronic warfare, and its capabilities exceed those of the AFAR. The ROFAR is much more compact. It can easily be installed on a UAV. A very promising topic. The only thing missing for its implementation was photonic integrated circuits on photonic processors, which were also recently presented. So the ROFAR is no longer some distant future, but the very present.

[nickname7]

The only thing missing to implement it was photonic integrated circuits.

So ROFAR is no longer some distant future, but the very present.

You contradict yourself, there are no microcircuits, but it is already real. Real is when the product is manufactured and works, for example, your computer on which you work exists in the present, but your ROFAR does not exist. You are lying.

[Orange Bigg]

Previously, there were not enough photonic integrated circuits. I emphasize earlier, that is, in the past, but today they already exist.

.your ROFAR does not exist

The media reported on the successful completion of the ROFAR prototype tests.

[aesculapius]

I've heard this somewhere before... - New Vasyuki?

[Orange Bigg]

Quote: eskulap

I've heard this somewhere before... - New Vasyuki?

No. This is reality. Google it if you don't believe it.

[nickname7]

according to ROFAR will be received

When they receive it, then come. Otherwise, it's like "I'll teach a donkey to talk."
All the powerful developments of your propagandists are somewhere in the future, but we will not live to see them.

We have also tested detonation engines and even have images of them from forums

Are you going to fly in the images?

[turembo]

An interesting article, but it reads with some touch of nostalgic sadness. To be honest, I'm not sure that MiG will be able to produce anything, the closure of the MiG 1.44 project in 2000, I think, hit the design bureau hard, since that time MiG has only carried out various upgrades and production of "old hits", but for 25 years it seems that not a single experimental project or prototype for scientific research has been created. And 20 years for production is a huge period, in the best case there are still people who designed the MiG 1.44, but most likely they can be counted on the fingers. Ideally, the design bureau should work constantly, this is the only way to ensure the continuity of personnel and the transfer of knowledge, thereby improving each subsequent project, eliminating mistakes and unsuccessful decisions of previous projects. Personnel decide a lot, and we have not learned to value them in 30 years.

[Obi-Wan Kenobi]

Interesting article

Sweet dreams with popcorn. Nothing more...

[Neutral Neutral]

It's their own fault: they could have made a heavy drone based on the MiG-35's developments, and now the Ministry of Defense would have snatched it up, but you have to be able to recognize trends in military technologies...

[Amateur]

The latest "Mitrofanovism" evoked a strong association with O.I. Bender-bey's lecture "A FERTILE DEBUT IDEA".

[Skif3216]

Now, when a MiG-31 takes off, an air raid alarm is announced all over Ukraine. The same thing should happen when a MiG-41 takes off, only not only ground targets will "run away", but also air ones.

The question is, when could such a machine be created? First flight in 2040? Or in 2050?

Unexpectedly, Mitrofanov's rather sober view of the course of the SVO.

[Eug]

MiG-41 has no defense against crowbar (article title).

Especially if there is no crowbar itself...

[Hole puncher]

The MiG-41 can presumably solve the following tasks:
- destruction of high-altitude supersonic and hypersonic, manned and unmanned reconnaissance and strike systems;
- interception of hypersonic missiles from combat alert mode in the air;
- destruction at long and ultra-long range of particularly important air targets, such as airborne early warning and control (AEW&C) aircraft, refueling aircraft, reconnaissance aircraft, anti-submarine aircraft, and strategic bombers;
- use of anti-satellite weapons and delivery of payloads to low Earth orbit (LEO);
- use as a first stage for launching existing and future hypersonic missiles.

And the destruction of the Death Star through the ventilation hole is a must.

[mark1]

Again a tale about what we don’t know, what we don’t know, but really want to know.
Bayans and storytellers, guslars and balalaika players, and other akyns, let's wait for at least an official picture (better yet, a model) and then we can start singing.

[Vladimir-TTT]

Quote: mark1

let's wait for at least an official picture (better yet a layout) and then we can start.

Or maybe we don't need a model?
In our country, so much of the budget has been spent using mock-ups - remember the nuclear tug Zeus - that there is no money left for conventional weapons, the SVO is in its fourth year, and there is no apparent advantage in weapons over the enemy.

[Feodor13]

Storytellers, guslars and akyns appear only when there is an appropriate audience.
If at least 1% of forum members had at least one publication, I would agree with you.

[Soldatov V.]

Mitrofanov writes correctly, proposing and discussing the future MiG-41. Everyone, both professionals and aviation enthusiasts, can put forward ideas and dream. One way is to create or make a new aircraft based on the MiG-25 or MiG-31 from new modern materials, albeit with the same speed characteristics and range. Another way is a new fuselage with a different aerodynamic characteristic, new engines allowing to increase the altitude and speed, as Mitrofanov suggests up to 35 km and 3500-4000 km. One of the problems of MiGs is the melting of the cockpit glass at speeds above 3000 km. Maybe it is worth solving it with a closing heat-resistant metal curtain and flying by instruments. If I am not mistaken, the MiG company began with the high-altitude fighters with the MiG-3 before WWII. It is in their tradition.

[IVZ]

Thank you for a normal comment. I agree, it is necessary for both specialists and ordinary citizens to put forward and discuss ideas, as well as ways to implement them and obstacles along the way. This is much more productive than competitions in the savoriness of spitting high - a popular sport among some commentators.

[dimon642]

Here they can’t create an aircraft based on the An 2, I’m not even talking about the An12, An 24, and you immediately created a 31th generation aircraft based on the MiG6, it’s not funny.

[Soldatov V.]

I agree with you, as a designer and technologist I will say how to surpass the wheel invented thousands of years ago? The same with the AN-2 and AN-12, 24. Brilliant airplanes. What do we have? TsAGI, other scientific and industrial institutes in various fields. When you set them the right goal, task, they will move mountains.

[Vadim S]

KB MIG is on the verge of bankruptcy! Read the articles in the financial sector, it is not clear what they are doing there, but not airplanes. As usual, we like to wait until the last minute and then shout that it was needed yesterday. I do not believe that there will be a new airplane anytime soon.

[Dedok]

KB Mig is on the verge of bankruptcy!

and is the MiG Design Bureau an independent entity in terms of finances?
or is it a subsidiary of UAC?
then what bankruptcy are we talking about?
Pogosyan is whipping up a "wave" for a complete purge? No wonder

[Vadim S]

This is exactly what we are talking about bankruptcy! Read RBC and other financial sources, and not just the ura-patra articles

[Denis812]

Quote: Vadim S

KB Mig on the verge of bankruptcy

Probably because the MiG design bureau hasn’t produced anything worthwhile in the last 30 years.
Perhaps the modernization of the MiG-31.
The piecemeal production of the unclaimed MiG-35 is a mistake, not an achievement.

[Dedok]

In addition, the author would very much like thatso that in our country there would be internal competition in the issue of creating combat aviation tactical class, between at least two design bureaus.

what does the Author's desire have to do with it?
This must be a conscious need of the Government
but we always have "our own way" - and here Pogosyan can "bury" the MiG, Yak, Il, Tu - or everything that is left of them...

[Doctor]

A small missile carrier is needed. A carrier of two air-to-ground missiles of the Kinzhal type.

[Maks1995]

Aren't you tired of fooling readers with the MIG-41?
For about 30 years now, various authors have been fooling people.
MIG-41, MIG-41... but it's not here and won't be coming. MIG is in decline, all that's left is to repair the old ones, the specialists have gone to the SU - according to the media.
At the latest exhibitions they can’t even present a model - only models, based on photos from the media.

IMHO, stop fooling the readers....

[garri-lin]

Stop posting crap about Kinzhal on PAK DP.
With the MiG 31, this was a necessary measure, plus the presence of a little-used platform.
There is no need for this in the long term. What is needed is a regular mass-produced missile carrier.
So that the enemy wouldn’t understand whether there was a FAB 1500 at the front or a Kinzhal at a particularly important target in the deep rear.

[Rabioso]

Russian planes are the best. Especially those that haven't been produced yet.

[bear cub]

"The ground shook under the tracks of the T-14 tanks passing me, and right behind them were countless 2S35 howitzers. I looked up and saw many MiG-41s roaring above my head. Tears of emotion ran down my cheeks. And then I woke up."

[Dedok]

I looked up and there was a multitude roaring above my head. MiG-41Tears of emotion flowed down my cheeks.

If they wrote Su-57 I would believe it...

[Denis812]

"The ground shook under the tracks of the T-14 tanks passing me, and right behind them were countless 2S35 howitzers."
And then a pack of two-hundred-dollar drones flew in and dismantled this entire super-armada in five minutes.

[John_McCormack]

The aircraft is needed to perform tasks that the heavy Su 57 cannot perform.
Shooting at fuel tankers, AWACS and satellites.
That's all I wanted to say.

Interception of hypersonic missiles - why can't air defense systems do this and how should the MiG-41 do it?
Because well, there is a moment with the fact that the Patriot intercepts hypersonic missiles Dagger. Surely, other systems are being developed in the world for such a prospect.

But creating a separate, specialized aircraft to launch a rocket makes no sense.
Even the Mig 31 itself is meaningless. It has a miraculous use as a platform for a dagger.

For some reason, Russia loves to create weapons that make no sense. Instead of creating a conditional F 15/F15E or F 22, this country creates the Su 34 and Su 35. Which have minimal differences and in most cases perform the same tasks.
They are trying to revive the project of a high-altitude supersonic bomber in a reality where missiles fly at a speed of Mach 3+ and hit at an altitude of up to 30 km, and the strategy of low-frequency penetration of air defenses dominates the world.

They are really preparing for the last war.

[DO]

Quote from John_McCormack

The aircraft is needed to perform tasks that the heavy Su 57 cannot perform.

Good idea.

Quote from John_McCormack

Interception of hypersonic missiles - why can't air defense systems do this and how should the MiG-41 do it?

The length of the Northern Sea Route, and accordingly the northern border of Russia, is about 5000 km. Even the USSR did not have the resources to create the necessary air defense infrastructure of such length. Even back then, a solution was found - the super-fast interceptor MiG-31.

Quote from John_McCormack

Mig 31 itself is meaningless. It miraculously found a use as a platform for a dagger.

No other aircraft can lift a rocket higher and accelerate it more. That's why the MiG-31 is the best choice as a reusable manned first stage of a rocket.
Moreover, in addition to the Kinzhal, there are also relevant anti-satellite missiles launched from the same MiG-31.

Quote from John_McCormack

For some reason, in Russia they really like to create weapons that make no sense. Instead of creating a conditional f 15/f15e or f 22

To listen to you, it turns out that the McDonnell Douglas and Lockheed Martin pushers are sleeping on the rug in the reception rooms of Russian officials, hoping to sell a license :)))

In this country they create Su 34 and Su 35, which have minimal differences and in most cases perform the same tasks.

Same tasks? It seems you are not aware that today the Su-34 bomber throws gliding bombs and dodges enemy air defense missiles, while the Su-35 covers it, coordinates, and fires its missiles at enemy air defense systems and missiles (rarely at aircraft).

[VlK]

The length of the Northern Sea Route, and accordingly the northern border of Russia, is about 5000 km. Even the USSR did not have the resources to create the necessary air defense infrastructure of such length. Even back then, a solution was found - the super-fast interceptor MiG-31.

the idea itself is unclear - is it possible to optimally combine in one machine the functions of a flying radar with a missile battery, which will patrol the area waiting for a hypersonic target (as written in the article), with a high-speed interceptor? For example, should it have a fuel reserve like a tanker, or will it need to be constantly refueled in the air while on duty? And is it worth combining these functions at all, and not, on the contrary, separating them for two different specialized aircraft - an interceptor and an air defense missile? According to the modern trend, on the contrary, there is a separation of the functions of target designation and destruction within a single system (reconnaissance and strike circuit)

[DO]

Quote: VlK

For example, should it have a fuel reserve like a tanker, or will it need to be constantly refueled in the air while on duty? And is it worth combining these functions at all, or, on the contrary, not separating them for two different specialized aircraft - an interceptor and an air defense missile? According to the modern trend, on the contrary, there is a separation of the functions of target designation and destruction within a single system (reconnaissance and strike circuit)

Who would argue that the separation of the functions of target designation and destruction is correct.
However, it is obvious that we will have to take into account the availability of specific target designation means here and now. For example, the A-50s that we have today are not enough. Will it be possible to quickly create, for example, tethered aerostats with radar, hang AFAR panels on heavy UAVs with the required power-to-weight ratio, or create stratospheric UAV pseudo-satellites? If not, we will have to plan the duty of interceptor fighters taking into account the fuel reserve, or refuel in the air.

[Denis812]

It is generally possible to optimally combine in one machine the functions of a flying radar with a missile battery, which will patrol the area in anticipation of a hypersonic target

Well, this is the MiG-31 and in the future 41.
A powerful radar, which is better than even the Su-35, enormous speed and the ability to use heavy long-range missiles.

[VlK]

and how long can it stand watch in its area of ​​responsibility, monitoring and covering a certain area of ​​territory with its powerful radar and missiles? Not flying at full speed to a point based on external target designation, but rather performing the function of a flying radar with weapons?

[wladimirjankov]

The promising long-range interceptor is being developed by the RSC MiG company.

The author seems to be unaware of what RSK MiG is today, so he builds up projects and fantastic versions in his article that have nothing to do with reality. What MIG-41, they won't be able to make a "maize" today.

[anclevalico]

Dreamers and writers. Who will do it? Where are the personnel? This is in a country that has been sawing up Su-57s for 15 years...

[Denis812]

Comrade writer. The Su-57 has been fighting in the SVO for 3 years now.
And before that, he also took part in Syria.
What's the problem? That they didn't make 100500 of them?

[Ezekiel 25-17]

The MiG-41 will fly and go into space: that’s how we need it.

[Mister who]

good idea, taking out air defense with the help of drones, the second echelon of high-altitude bombers, even if the surviving air defense fires, the altitude and speed of leaving the affected area will be beneficial.

[Mxabr]

In civil aviation they have already made a "powerful breakthrough" - they have degenerated an engine that is twice as expensive as an imported one. And here, the entire periodic table is underfoot, and the civil aviation is standing still. Glory to Russian officials and bureaucrats. Long live kickbacks!

[Neutral Neutral]

Bullshit: something new is always more expensive than something mass-produced and debugged.

[james]

There will be no MIG-41, because Sukhoi is doing everything to be a monopolist

[Jurkovs]

Unfortunately, the connection between generations has been broken in the MiG design bureau, which means that the design school must be created from scratch. And this is the main difficulty.

[udushyev]

It won't. At least not until the end of the war, since there aren't enough forces even for civil aviation. Besides, where are the personnel?

[fiv]

The main thing for Russian bureaucrats, whether with or without epaulettes, is the invention of PowerPoint, in which you can make reports with pictures, like comics. The format does not imply deep immersion in the subject and you can talk about aircraft construction with a purchased diploma from the Academy of National Economy. And promise thousands of planes in a small number of years. It is necessary to prohibit the use of verbs in the future tense by officials of any level (including various directors). We are tired of chatterboxes for state money.

[AC130 Gunship]

What the hell is "first flight in 2030"? Pogosyan strangled the MiG design bureau completely and finally 20 years ago.
The aged 1.44 stands sadly in the corner of the Flight Research Institute.
And the few who are still in the design bureau (many either quit or went to Su) can only modernize the MiG-29 and 31 developed in the 70s. They will either hang a new missile, or change the radar.
There will be no 41. And there has been no point in such a machine for a long time. Fighter manufacturers have long returned to the speed of 1.8-2 Mach. As it turned out, after the SR71 was removed from service 32 years ago, no one needs 2.5-3 Mach at all.
And the pictures - they are certainly beautiful

[AC130 Gunship]

Quote: Ezekiel 25-17

The MiG-41 will fly and go into space: that’s how we need it.

An old American movie with Clint Eastwood shows how American intelligence saw the MiG-31 in the 70s. Even they were very disappointed to learn that it was just a modification of the MiG-25

[dragon772]

The new modification of the Belka radar should be able to see AWACS at a distance of 1000 km?
Are there any means of fire destruction at such a range in nature? Or will they only appear in 50 years?
This is a very science-intensive and extremely expensive project.
The MiG-25 and MiG-31 were made by the USSR, but now mass production of aircraft is only carried out for the Ministry of Defense.
Su-57 now ~40, F-22 (not produced) - 187, F-35 (A, B, C) - more than 1100.

[Taoist]

So, from my memories, when I was writing my term paper at school on "promising layout scheme of high supersonic speed aircraft", I de facto got the layout of the MiG 1.44 - the only difference was that instead of ventral vertical stabilizers I used downward-deflected wing consoles with reverse sweep. This is taking into account the fact that we had not heard about "low visibility" back then and no one told us about the promising work of the Mikoyan Design Bureau either. But similar tasks lead to similar layout solutions...

[Andriuha077]

The Su-57 patrols, and on request, single-engine unmanned carriers of various specializations attached to them rise and strike the enemy under enormous overloads.
I will imagine various gliders similar to a simplified, slightly reduced MiG-25, with 1xNK-32, and with various other engines.

[26_Sergey_26]

Yes, you need to create your own aircraft first. Not a modernization of the Soviet one, but your own.
And what kind of aircraft it will be - MiG, Su, Il Yak - that’s not important.
You can't blame the Yak-130, there is such cooperation between different countries that you can't tell where is whose. And overall it didn't work out very well.
I am talking about my completely Russian development. And no integration is needed.
And then they integrated it to the point that there was nothing left of their own.

[Jager]

They never created a line of decent OWN cars. Civil aviation is full of questions and postponements...
And the author is talking about the MIG-41.

[Zaurbek]

People, before we take on the MiG41, let's launch a large series of Su57, Su75.
Let's unify the 4+++ generation with them...and we will be happy.

[DO]

the author would very much like for there to be internal competition in our country in the matter of creating tactical class combat aviation, at least between two design bureaus

Planer
In the basic version, we start from the airframe of the MiG-25 and MiG-31 aircraft line.

There will be no hypersonic speed or space travel, stealth or super-maneuverability (it’s strange that anyone would even talk about super-maneuverability in relation to a vehicle like the PAK DP), but within the framework of the previously outlined tasks, all of this is not required.

Engine
For the basic version, the option of restoring production of the existing D-30F6 turbojet engines, which are part of the MiG-31, but in a modernized version, can be considered.

BREO (...)
Despite the fact that the MiG-41 radar system will be developed anew, it could potentially be based on the Belka radar system developed for the Su-57 fifth-generation fighter.

These ideas are so consistent with my own views that I will not hide the fact that I got great pleasure from reading this article.

So it turns out that a replacement for the MiG-31 is needed as soon as possible, with the first flight tentatively in 2030 and serial production no later than 2035.

The impression was spoiled by the author's proposed timeframes for implementing these ideas. Because we need to fight here and now, and develop the development and production of weapons at the pace that was in the Great Patriotic War.
And after 10 years of rapid evolution of weapons in combat conditions, God knows whether such a product will be needed in serial quantities, or whether much will change and reality will force us to produce something else.

The MiG-35, which, apparently, was not in demand

Here the author has recorded the current state of affairs. Therefore, I would like to address the question to the "State Planning Committee of the Military-Industrial Complex", to the Government. Today, long-range drones and not yet the longest-range cruise missiles of the Ukrainian Armed Forces cause significant damage to the infrastructure of the Russian Federation. The reasons for this are not only the insufficiency of ground-based air defense systems. The main reason for achieving the goals of the Ukrainian Armed Forces is the technical intelligence data received by the Ukrainian Armed Forces from NATO. Because before launching, the Ukrainian Armed Forces know the exact configuration of the "holes" in the Russian air defense, and they lay out optimal routes for their drones.
What can be countered? A sufficient number of manned fighter-interceptors, drones and cruise missiles deployed in the rear. Sukhoi fighters are excessive for this purpose, and saturating the rear with a sufficient number of MiG-35 interceptors would "mix up all the cards" for the enemy.
The costs of production and operation of MiG-35 interceptors will definitely pay for themselves through the savings of Russian infrastructure facilities.

[VlK]

The reasons for this are not only the insufficiency of ground-based air defense systems. The main reason for the achievement of the goals of the Ukrainian Armed Forces is the technical intelligence data received by the Ukrainian Armed Forces from NATO. Because the Ukrainian Armed Forces know the exact configuration of the "holes" in the Russian air defense before launching, and they lay out optimal routes for their pepelats.
What can be countered? A sufficient number of manned fighter-interceptors, drones and cruise missiles deployed in the rear. Sukhoi fighters are excessive for this purpose, and saturating the rear with a sufficient number of MiG-35 interceptors would "mix up all the cards" for the enemy.

It is obvious that first of all we need to close the holes in the field of detection of air targets on the southern borders, and not deploy additional squadrons in the Samara region, near Izhevsk and everywhere, everywhere, everywhere, there are not enough resources for that.

[DO]

First of all, we need to close the holes in the detection field of air targets on the southern borders, and not deploy additional squadrons in the Samara region, near Izhevsk and everywhere, everywhere, everywhere, there are not enough resources for that.

Let's assume that a proper ground-based air defense line will be created on the Ukrainian border, and on all western borders in general. But the enemy can create holes in the air defense line - by overloading it with dummy drones, or by disabling ground-based air defense facilities. And then the endless Russian expanses begin, for the protection of which no ground-based air defense systems will be enough. Only the most important factories, airfields, nuclear power plants, oil refineries, etc. can be locally protected by air defense facilities.
Fighter-interceptors do not stand still, and NATO reconnaissance means do not know in advance their patrol routes. For a given probability of hitting targets, interceptors are required much less than ground-based air defense systems.

[VlK]

As far as we can understand, our problem now is not with interception, but with timely detection of such targets. These low-visibility but slow-moving drones can then be intercepted by helicopters (by the way, there is still a question about the ability of supersonic fighters to detect and intercept them) and mobile air defense groups. But where should fighters look for them in the vast expanses?
And a competently constructed air defense system must mutually cover its zones with detection means. So the construction of such an airspace control system is a priority task, the rest is a palliative.

[DO]

Quote: VlK

As far as we can understand, our problem now is not with interception, but with the timely detection of such targets

There are problems with both.
However, you are right, it would be correct to separate the functions of detection/target designation and destruction of targets. Accordingly, tethered aerostats with radar, heavy energy-armed UAVs with suspended AFAR webs, pseudo-satellites are appropriate in the rear.
In theory - yes, but in practice - alas, not yet. Accordingly, there is nothing else to reconnoiter targets over the "white spots" of the radar field except the fighter-interceptor radar.

These low-visibility but slow-moving drones can then be intercepted by helicopters (by the way, there is still a question about the ability of supersonic fighters to detect and intercept them) and mobile air defense groups.

The advantage of a fighter-interceptor as a means of destroying a target is the speed with which it reaches the required square, performs additional target detection using an onboard radar, and flies up to it in pursuit. A fighter can easily shoot down a slow-moving target with a missile, but it is more difficult with a cannon. If with a cannon, then at minimum speed, not on the first approach, but on subsequent ones.
Mobile air defense groups stuck in traffic jams are more of a means of object air defense.
A helicopter with a maximum speed of 300 km/h will not catch up with the drones with turbojet engines and a maximum speed of about 600 km/h that are appearing in the Ukrainian Armed Forces. Moreover, a helicopter is powerless against a cruise missile.

[Conjurer]

MiG-41: There is no defense against a crowbar

If there is no other scrap. It is useless to design a new aircraft while looking at your feet. It will become obsolete before it replaces the previous one (due to the rate of production), so the characteristics of the new aircraft must exceed future requirements for the aircraft with a reserve for its entire service life, and not just for the period of production.
The MiG-31 corresponds to this, but the version proposed by the author does not. That is, the implementation of such a proposal is a waste of money.
In general, the use of interceptors is our specialty (nobody in the world is interested in them), and it is connected with our geography - huge unpopulated territories that need to be controlled in terms of air defense. This is where the required properties of the aircraft come from - long range, high speed for interception, large payload - this is a flying air defense system. But during a war it is no longer needed, it is replaced by conventional frontline fighters (the Kinzhal does not count, because it is a surrogate, the missile should not be critically dependent on the type of carrier), and it is unsuitable for war either as a fighter (too clumsy) or as an attack aircraft (too poor weight to payload ratio). That is, this is a machine for peacetime and the initial period of a war, when the enemy has not yet pulled up its aviation to our northern and eastern borders. After that, the machine will become useless, it has nothing to oppose to mass fighter aviation.
That is why only 100-150 of them are needed (as the author claims), and I think that is why the PAK-DA program is not being pushed too hard; during a military confrontation, frontline fighters are more important than interceptors.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

In general, the use of interceptors is our specialty (nobody in the world is interested in them), and it is connected with our geography - huge unpopulated territories that need to be controlled in terms of air defense. This is where the required properties of the aircraft come from - long range, high speed for interception, large payload - this is a flying air defense system. But during a war it is no longer needed, it is replaced by conventional frontline fighters (the Kinzhal does not count, because it is a surrogate, the missile should not be critically dependent on the type of carrier), and it is unsuitable for war either as a fighter (too clumsy) or as an attack aircraft (too poor weight to payload ratio). That is, this is a machine for peacetime and the initial period of a war, when the enemy has not yet pulled up its aviation to our northern and eastern borders. After that, the machine will become useless, it has nothing to oppose to mass fighter aviation.

During the war, the Russian expanses will not disappear. The enemy is unlikely to send an aircraft carrier to the northern shores of Russia, because this floating airfield is designed for a warmer climate and does not tolerate ice. Consequently, the need for specialized air defense interceptors in the north during the war will only increase.
As for the fighter, these are conventions. Because close air combat is becoming a thing of the past, and the operation of high-explosive missiles is the main function of the interceptor.
The use of the MiG-31/41 interceptor as the first stage of missiles (Kinzhal and anti-satellite) is entirely justified, since no other aircraft can perform this function better than this one.

[Conjurer]

In the north, aviation will be sent to Finland and Alaska, and it will block off the area for our interceptors on the entire Kola Peninsula and all the way to Arkhangelsk, and all of Kamchatka along with part of the Kuril Islands on the other side. They will only have to fly in the Igarka area, but who needs them there?
Regarding the fighter, have you seen MiG-31s ​​participating in air battles in Ukraine? Can you guess why?
Using an air defense interceptor as a booster stage for a missile with all its specialized equipment for solving air defense tasks and fuel reserves is like hammering nails with a microscope. They simply haven't found any other use for this aircraft in military operations, they use it somehow. In theory, if you want to use a stage with an air-jet engine to boost missiles, you need to use a drone. The flight program is standard, no special maneuvers requiring human participation are required. Moreover, the MiG is visible from God knows where, so it doesn't even fly close to the front line - a strange platform for this purpose.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

In the north, aviation will be sent to Finland and Alaska, and it will block off the area for our interceptors on the entire Kola Peninsula and all the way to Arkhangelsk, and all of Kamchatka along with part of the Kuril Islands on the other side. They will only have to fly in the Igarka area, but who needs them there?

From Arkhangelsk to Kamchatka there are more than 5000 km of Russian border (and the Northern Sea Route, which our “partners” have been drooling over for a long time).
What is your confidence based on (“who needs them there”) that drones, cruise missiles and aircraft will not fly across this border?
By the way, our “partners again” are not particularly hiding why they wanted to annex Greenland.

Quote: Conjurer

Regarding the fighter, have you seen MiG-31s ​​participating in air battles in Ukraine? Can you guess why?

So what's there to guess about?
Firstly, the MiG-31 is an air defense interceptor, not a frontline fighter.
Secondly, the MiG-31 is not produced today, but there is a demand for these aircraft.
And "regarding the fighter", fighters are included in the menu of the MiG-31 interceptor.

Quote: Conjurer

Using an air defense interceptor as a booster stage for a missile with all its specialized equipment for solving air defense tasks and fuel reserves is like hammering nails with a microscope. They simply haven't found any other use for this aircraft in military operations, they use it somehow. In theory, if you want to use a stage with an air-jet engine to boost missiles, you need to use a drone. The flight program is standard, no special maneuvers requiring human participation are required. Moreover, the MiG is visible from God knows where, so it doesn't even fly close to the front line - a strange platform for this purpose.

Regarding the drone, your idea is correct. It would be nice to upgrade the moderately worn-out MiG-31s ​​into drones, removing all unnecessary parts and installing an autopilot like the S-70.

[Conjurer]

From Arkhangelsk to Kamchatka there are more than 5000 km of Russian border (and the Northern Sea Route, which our “partners” have been drooling over for a long time).

During a war, you can immediately forget about the Northern Sea Route as a transport route. Our "partners" will be hanging around there with their submarines, and we have nothing to form convoys from. And only object air defense will protect us from missile strikes from that side. At the very least, an interceptor will definitely not solve the problem of a massive missile attack.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

Only object air defense will protect against missile strikes from that side. At the very least, an interceptor will definitely not solve the problem of a massive missile attack.

Any air defense system can be overloaded and suppressed, including object-based ones.
Air defense interceptors have the advantage over ground-based systems that their current position in the air is not known in advance by enemy reconnaissance.
In any case, with the presence of an air defense component, the probability of hitting Russian targets is less than without it. Especially targets that are not protected or are poorly protected by ground-based air defense.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

During a war, you can immediately forget about the Northern Sea Route as a transport route. Our "partners" will be hanging around there with their submarines, and we have nothing to form convoys from.

It is clear that submarines in a submerged position, especially under ice, can only be detected by hydroacoustic means, which have no direct relation to interceptors. But interceptors, in theory, can be armed with homing small-sized torpedoes, or missile-torpedoes, and when an enemy submarine is detected, they can be used to deliver these weapons. Because, as you wrote, we have a problem with the Navy compared to NATO.

[Conjurer]

Interceptors, in comparison with object air defense, have a meager supply of ammunition and cannot provide any noticeable assistance in repelling a massive attack. Their purpose is to intercept missile carriers in the air. But, given the flight range of modern cruise missiles, their carriers will not fly further than the coast of the Arctic Ocean, i.e. interceptors must operate above it, and for this, air defense air bases with many strips, warehouses and supply routes for materiel from the mainland must be deployed on this coast (otherwise this base will not operate for long). All this is so expensive that it is easier to keep air defense divisions of frontline fighters near large industrial agglomerations and a multi-echelon group of missile air defense. And interceptors are used to intercept single targets such as reconnaissance aircraft.

[DO]

Interceptors, in comparison with target air defense, have a meager supply of ammunition and cannot provide any significant assistance in repelling a massive attack.

The primary objective of the air enemy in attacks on the object is to overload the object's air defense with mainly false targets, and to identify the coordinates of ground radars and launchers. After which, with the next wave, destroy the detected ground air defense infrastructure. And then strike the target objects, experiencing only residual counteraction.
That is, after the air defense facility is suppressed, there is nothing to defend the facility with except air defense aircraft.
It is clear that frontline fighters are adequate as an aviation part of the object air defense, and specialized MiG-31s ​​are redundant. Or maybe even not frontline Su-35s are appropriate, but a cheaper solution in the form of light "rear" MiG-XNUMX interceptors. Which can protect, among other things, rear facilities that do not have sufficient object air defense, or do not have it at all.

Quote: Conjurer

But, given the range of modern cruise missiles, their carriers will not fly further than the coast of the Arctic Ocean, i.e. interceptors must operate above it, and for this purpose, air defense air bases with multiple strips, warehouses and supply routes from the mainland must be deployed on this coast (otherwise this base will not operate for long). All this is so expensive that it is easier to keep air defense divisions of frontline fighters near large industrial agglomerations and a multi-echelon group of missile air defense. And interceptors are used to intercept single targets such as reconnaissance aircraft.

For example, Tomahawks have a range of up to 2,5 thousand km. If they are launched from carriers approximately from the northern coast, they will fall just short of the southern borders of Russia - that is, they will reach the main cities of Siberia. And if the enemy has the opportunity to carry out such strikes without hindrance, he will certainly use it. How to prevent this? It is practically impossible to build an air defense line along 5000 thousand km of the northern coast of Russia. Therefore, only MiG-31 class interceptors can help here, in reasonable quantities.

[Conjurer]

overload the air defense facilities with mostly false targets and identify the coordinates of ground radars and launchers. Then destroy the discovered ground-based air defense infrastructure with the next wave.

This is possible at the front line (i.e. near your base), but impossible at a distance across the ocean. How to pause between waves, how to evaluate the result of the attack of the first wave in order to adjust the second strike? Will the strategists be spinning around the coast for three hours while the first wave flies to the target? Fly from the US in waves one after another? Overloading the air defense in this case means launching as many missiles at the target as possible at once, ignoring the air defense. Simply because there are more anti-aircraft missiles at the base than you can bring missiles to the strategists, this reserve is specially calculated, so the only thing you can hit the target with is what slips through during the reloading of the SAM's ammo.
Now about the expenses. You fire long-range (i.e. strategic) cruise missiles from strategists, and they are shot down by short- and medium-range anti-aircraft missiles. That is, even despite the fact that your strategic bombers do not shoot down, you spend many times more money on fuel and missiles than the enemy. That is, you lose technically. The same applies to our strategists, firing long-range cruise missiles at American territory. The Americans cannot shoot them down, they simply cannot reach them with their aircraft, but they will intercept the missiles and spend less money on this than we do on the attack.
I have already spoken about interceptors, in order to use them effectively, i.e. to prevent strategic strikes on our territory, they need to be placed on the Arctic coast. By the way, they could be used to cover the east by placing them on the southern Kurils. But the Americans are not fools to rush into trouble, they will first level the islands with the ocean with ballistics, and only then will they fly.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

This is possible at the front line (i.e. near your base), but impossible at a distance across the ocean. How to pause between waves, how to evaluate the result of the attack of the first wave in order to adjust the second strike? Will the strategists be spinning around the coast for three hours while the first wave flies to the target? Fly from the US in waves one after another? Overloading the air defense in this case means launching as many missiles at the target as possible at once, ignoring the air defense. Simply because there are more anti-aircraft missiles at the base than you can bring missiles to the strategists, this reserve is specially calculated, so the only thing you can hit the target with is what slips through during the reloading of the SAM's ammo.

Regarding the air defense overload. If it flies to us from their land across the ocean, or even from planes, then you are absolutely right, it is not a massive attack. And here the MiG-31 can fully fulfill its purpose.
But 80% of the strike potential of the "again partners" is carried by their Navy. Therefore, if there is a massive attack from them with cruise missiles and drones, then from the sea. In this case, MiG-31 aircraft would also be useful, in addition to other means - for launching Kalibrs in a naval version.

Quote: Conjurer

Now about expenses. You fire long-range (i.e. strategic) cruise missiles from strategists, and they are shot down by short- and medium-range anti-aircraft missiles. That is, even despite the fact that your strategic bombers do not shoot down, you spend many times more money on fuel and missiles than the enemy.

The "partners again" have as much money as a fool has tobacco. Because they have a magic printer. Remember how after the pandemic they threw "helicopter money" to their companies without counting.

Quote: Conjurer

The same applies to our strategists, who fire long-range cruise missiles at American territory. The Americans cannot shoot them down, they simply cannot reach them with their aircraft, but they will intercept the missiles and spend less money on this than we would on an attack.

It is impossible to achieve a military victory by exchanging air strikes without the participation of infantry. Therefore, this is rather a continuation of politics with military instruments. Consequently, the calculations here are not based on the price of weapons, but on completely different categories. And politicians, not military men, will count and make decisions here.

Quote: Conjurer

By the way, they could be used to cover themselves from the east by placing them on the southern Kurils. But the Americans are not fools to rush into trouble, they will first level the islands with the ocean with ballistics, and only then will they fly.

Ballistics is the next stage of escalation, after drones and conventional cruise missiles. If it flies at us, it will fly at them too, for starters, the non-nuclear Oreshnik. This also applies to nuclear weapons. Until now, these brakes worked. The fact that the leaders have started talking again gives hope that reason will prevail and the worst will not happen.
===
As I understand, you are a supporter of only ground-based air defense. But you can't put all your eggs in one basket. The war we are being forced into is not a cheap affair, for any air defense systems.

[Conjurer]

As I understand it, you are a supporter of only ground-based air defense.

))) No, I'm just a rationalist.
By the way, about the American printing press. Do you know why Trump was so impressed by the unfortunate victims in Ukraine that he wants to end everything immediately, and also by the unfair attitude towards America, that he introduced duties (i.e. levies) against everyone, and also became concerned about ineffective spending (theft) in the American state? He has no money. Despite the printing press. And, in general, any war is waged for real money (for real values ​​- gold, for example), because the result of its end is not known in advance, and those who supply you with weapons do not want to be left with paper in their hands.
Here the Americans invested in the war in Ukraine to get dividends, at least political ones, they flew by, and now they are frantically trying to scratch at least something out of Ukraine, because they did not worry about the liquidity of what they received in exchange for their supplies in a timely manner))))) I am saying this because you cannot help but count your expenses on the war, otherwise there may not be enough money for victory.

[DO]

About American money. The dollar is the main world currency. And it is printed in the USA. Therefore, green cut paper and virtual dollar figures in bank servers pay with real resources for all countries that use the dollar.
The Europeans' attempts to introduce a competing euro and pay for oil with it immediately ended with American bombing of a country in central Europe. And today, none of the US satellites are ready to really give up the dollar. Trump introduced duties, and all the US satellites flocked to the mother country to negotiate. And Canada will join the US, it has nowhere to go.
And with Russia, starting from the 90s, the US did whatever it wanted, using the same dollar. However, they had self-confident fools in power, not wanting to know history, who began to move NATO towards Russia and threaten it with military force. We see the results, and they are not brilliant for the US today.

[Conjurer]

The dollar is the main world currency. And it is printed in the USA.

There is a nuance. Since the dollar is the world reserve currency, the US cannot simply print it, they can only borrow - such are the terms of the deal on the world reserve currency. The debt always bears interest and it is already such that it is commensurate with the US GDP, i.e. they cannot pay it back in a year (and, given that their GDP is only 10% real production, i.e. what can be sold to someone, then not in 10 years), and now a trend is already visible - US government bonds (that same debt) have lost their attractiveness (i.e. they do not want to take them. This is evident from the fact that against the background of stock market turbulence now in the US, the prices of government bonds are not growing, as always before, but falling. I.e. they are dumped). All this means that the US will no longer be able to increase the debt, i.e. turn on the printing press. That is why I claim that Trump has run out of money.

[DO]

Since the dollar is the world's reserve currency, the US cannot simply print it, they can only borrow it - these are the terms of the deal on the world reserve currency.

Yes, the printing press of American dollars belongs to the bankers. Yes, the American national debt to these bankers grows from year to year and will continue to grow. And it has long been believed that the American government does not really intend to repay this debt. This is a kind of convention, a source of power for the creditor bankers. Why a convention? What will happen if the creditor bankers suddenly demand to repay a debt commensurate with the price of America, and the American government fulfills this demand, that is, declares itself bankrupt? Are the bankers ready to take on the functions of the American government? Of course not, they are satisfied with the current state of affairs - the products of the dollar printing press are exchanged with other countries for real raw materials and goods. Only a real refusal by other countries to settle accounts in dollars can stop such an exchange. Hence, at the turn of the century, the military reaction of the United States to the attempt by European countries to settle accounts in euros for oil. And today's refusal of the United States to return the stored gold of Germany (that is, an alternative currency to the dollar) - up to threats to use a contingent of American military bases and special services against the petitioners. And the US owes almost $8 trillion to foreign countries, which together hold almost 25% of the total US debt. The best way to make a creditor forget about a loan is a war in which that creditor participates. So America dragging Western Europe into a war with Russia is a process from the same barrel.

[Conjurer]

Yes, the printing press...

That's not how it works. The American government issues government bonds on the stock market (i.e. makes a loan), and the Federal Reserve System buys them back (so that their price doesn't fall, otherwise they'll have to raise interest rates on them so that there are people willing to buy them) with printed dollars. That's how the dollars end up in the hands of the government, which has to pay back an additional amount (the government debt has grown), and the Federal Reserve System slowly sells these government bonds, which is how it makes money. But now the bonds are getting cheaper, which means it won't be possible to sell them profitably, as soon as the price drops, the Federal Reserve System won't sell them, and the government can't put the bonds on the market for the same reason, i.e. it can't borrow money, and the Americans have a budget deficit, and the deficit needs to be covered somehow. That's why Trump is bustling about - he needs money.

The best way to make a creditor forget about a loan is to wage a war in which that creditor participates.

Together with you, and you will defeat him. If Europe fights with Russia and loses, then Russia will get all the goodies, and the US - nothing at all.
That's how it is now in Ukraine. The US invested because they were counting on victory, but there is no sign of victory and they started to fuss, while Russia has not yet completely captured Ukraine (and then there will be nothing to talk about), to agree with Russia on dividing up the junk.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

The American state budget has a deficit, the deficit needs to be covered somehow. That's why Trump is fussing - he needs money.

Everything is known in comparison. We would like to have American financial opportunities, even if it comes with problems! :)))

Quote: Conjurer

If Europe fights with Russia and loses, then Russia will get all the goodies, and the US will get nothing at all.

A similar situation already existed during and after WWII. The USA then received the role of world hegemon - not only due to domestic reforms in the USA, but also largely due to Roosevelt's pragmatic to the point of extreme cynicism foreign policy.
And the division of junk is a trifle, more of a reason to talk.

[Conjurer]

Everything is relative

)))))) Yes, but you need to compare debt and income, or income and expenses in percentage terms, not in absolute terms. A poor man is bankrupt, a rich man is bankrupt - these are the same financial states. We definitely don't need such a financial state.

A similar situation already occurred during and after WWII.

No. The US then got involved in the European war at the final stage and captured decent territories. That's the only reason they participated in the division of junk in Europe. And they made money on the supply of weapons and equipment to all the warring parties and, by the way, the division of junk. War destroys extremely unevenly, so there is a lot left to divide, usually more than is destroyed. Take Ukraine - if the Ukrainian Armed Forces crumble right now, then Russia will get 3/4 of its industry and agriculture intact. That's what the US is fussing about.

[DO]

Conjurer, regarding the American debt, the US has been living with it for many years, continuing to parasitize on other countries through the dollar. And it is not only the US that has a huge national debt.
The real problems for the US could theoretically come from outside, not from within. Only if other countries stop using dollars.
Today there are trends in this direction, but they are very insignificant.

[Conjurer]

Regarding the American debt, the US has been living with it for many years

The situation has simply changed. You can live with a debt as long as you can service it, i.e. pay at least interest on it, and as long as your creditors are confident that you will be able to repay the debt. Now the US is paying interest on a new loan, i.e. is not really able to service it, and creditors, judging by the downward fluctuation of US government bond prices, are no longer confident that the debtor is reliable.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

Do you know why Trump was so impressed by the unfortunate victims in Ukraine that he wants to end everything immediately, and also by the unfair attitude towards America, that he introduced duties (i.e. levies) against everyone, and also became concerned about ineffective spending (theft) in the American state? He has no money. Despite the printing press. And, in general, any war is waged for real money (for real values ​​- gold, for example), because the result of its end is not known in advance, and those who supply you with weapons do not want to be left with paper in their hands.
The Americans invested in the war in Ukraine to get dividends, at least political ones, but they missed out, and now they are frantically trying to scratch something out of Ukraine.

I don't think that today's political processes in the world can be explained by the lack of money in America.
While American "dollar therapy" was taking place in Russia from the 90s onwards, resources were being taken out of it, Russia's industry and army were degrading, and corruption was flourishing.
The self-confident and aggressive actions of the collective West to advance NATO to the borders of Russia led to the SVO in Ukraine. Consequently, to the attempts of the collective West to strangle Russia - by means of military pressure from the West on Russia through Ukraine by means of deliveries of Western weapons, mercenaries and personnel "vacationers", to the freezing of Russian banking assets, to countless banking, economic, trade and political sanctions towards Russia.
However, contrary to the expectations of the US and its satellites, after 3 years of the SVO the result turned out to be the opposite of what they wanted. The military industry of Russia, supported by the civilian sector and caring Russians, both ordinary and rich, is beginning to revive and do what is necessary for the front. The army gradually "woke up", suitable commanders for war came forward, drone operators were trained, contract soldiers learned to win in a modern war. The color revolution in Russia, passionately desired and promoted by "partners", did not happen. The actions of the Russian authorities to eradicate theft, primarily in the army, became noticeable.
In the context of the rapid loss of the US authority as a hegemon and a plague policeman, the growing popularity of BRICS, the new Trump team, being patriots of their country and trying to "make America great again" © (naturally, at the expense of other countries, primarily Russia), seem to have remembered all the US political actions in the past that brought it international success. Among them, the most prominent are Roosevelt's WWII-era policy of "the third rejoicing", and the American "dollar therapy" of Russia after the 90s. Plus the long-simmering desire of part of the American elite to annex Canada, supported by Trump, and the desire of businessman Trump to return industry to America.
From external appearances, it looks like Trump's team has begun to implement the above-mentioned supposed goals:
- to get out of the European conflict gracefully, while simultaneously igniting a major war in Europe;
- at least partially normalize relations with Russia, and most likely undertake or at least promise the suffering Russian lovers of freebies new attempts at "dollar therapy";
- very specific actions to join Canada;
- Trump's tariffs, designed to stimulate European, and possibly Chinese, industry to migrate to the United States.

[Conjurer]

Trump's team has begun to implement the above stated intended goals:

These goals are not in themselves, they are for something. Trump's main goals now are to reduce the national debt and restore manufacturing in the United States. Therefore
- exit from the conflict and from NATO support - reduction of costs,
- normalization of relations with Russia - reduction of costs of confrontation with China,
- introduction of duties - creation of a greenhouse for one's own industry, with whom it will work - increase of the sales market for one's own industry.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

Trump's main goals now are to reduce the national debt and restore manufacturing in the United States. Therefore
- exit from the conflict and from NATO support - reduction of costs,
- normalization of relations with Russia - reduction of costs of confrontation with China

Trump will not be able to significantly reduce the national debt today, even if he wanted to. And it is obvious that he does not intend to (I wrote about this above).
But restoring production in the US is indeed Trump's main goal.
The main goal of Trump's withdrawal from the European conflict and from NATO support is most likely an attempt to repeat Roosevelt's political decision in WWII, "the third rejoicing" (including thanks to which the US then emerged from the crisis and became the world hegemon after WWII). Minimizing costs is a reflex of businessman Trump, but it is secondary.
Normalization of relations with Russia is a straw laid down in case Russia wins the European war. And the desire to prevent escalation that leads to an exchange of nuclear strikes on the land of both countries. Again, these are "Roosevelt's precepts."
How the normalization of relations between the US and Russia (which so far has been expressed in the resumption of contacts at the highest level, but does not imply the lifting of sanctions) will reduce the US costs of confrontation with China, is not entirely clear to me personally. Because in the difficult conditions in which Russia finds itself today, spoiling its relations with China is completely inadequate.

[Conjurer]

The main goal of Trump's withdrawal from the European conflict...

By leaving the conflict, Trump certainly does not get an exchange of blows, besides, he shows the curs from Europe that he will not cover them if they do not calm down and get a punch in the teeth from Russia, but no one is going to let them go free. Trump himself needs Europe as a sales market, so he does not need a serious war there, if something happens, the American special services themselves will eliminate the most odious ones there, so as not to muddy the waters. But now, while he is negotiating with Russia, it is advantageous for him that they break loose from the chain to go to war. Bluff, but how can we do without it?

How normalization of US-Russia relations... will reduce US costs of confrontation with China... Because in the difficult conditions in which Russia finds itself today

Everything flows, everything changes. When Trump gets into a confrontation with China, there will be many dirty tricks, including creating problems with the supply of raw materials and supplies to China. It is one thing if Russia adheres to neutrality, as China is now with respect to Russia, i.e. does not reduce the growth of raw material prices in China, sell at the maximum, another thing if it replaces all suppliers at its own domestic prices and supports the competitiveness of Chinese industry in world markets against the American one.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

Trump himself needs Europe as a sales market

What will the US sell? The old American industry, thanks to the not entirely sane past US leadership, has long since left America for other countries where labor is cheaper. And today, before the US sells goods, it must first begin to produce them in sufficient quantities at an adequate price. Consequently, it is first necessary to force foreign industry to migrate to the US, and prepare the ground for industry through internal reforms. Trump is now trying with all his might to do both, not excluding even the annexation of Canada and the establishment of basic order in Mexico (whose people, unlike Canada, do not need to be persuaded to join, as evidenced by the initiative of the same Trump in his first term to expand the fence on the US-Mexican border).

he doesn't need a serious war there

Unfortunately, you are passing off what we Russians wish for as reality.
For industry to flee en masse from Europe to the USA, the energy problems and duties created by the Americans in Europe are not enough - these issues, although partially, are solvable. But from a big European war, all Westerners who have business and money will flee to the American continent.
===
Regarding the very complex issue of Russia's trade with China, we will hope for the professionalism of our government. Which will allow us to extract the maximum benefit for Russia from the situation, a benefit weighed between its various contradictory meanings.

[Conjurer]

but no one is going to let them go free. Trump himself needs Europe as a sales market,

This chain of phrases cannot be broken, the meaning is lost. The US twists the European elite as it pleases, and they are quite capable of ensuring with their help the flow of capital from Europe to the US without war, in fact they are already ensuring it.
But a big European war can go according to different scenarios, including the one where Russia will no longer let the US into Europe, then they will lose everything. Well, why should they risk it? How will it not let them in? And here is how the US is crawling away from Ukraine now.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

The US is twisting the European elite as it pleases, and they are quite capable of ensuring with their help the flow of capital from Europe to the US without war, in fact they are already ensuring it.
But a major European war could go according to different scenarios, including one in which Russia no longer lets the US into Europe, and then they will lose everything.

And yet, facts are stubborn things. Please explain the well-known preparation of the European elites, which the US twists as it pleases, for war with Russia.
According to banal logic, the US naturally does not expect that as a result of the war all of Europe will be occupied by Russia. But European business, which is still resisting and does not want to flee to the US, will flee anyway, and quickly.
A major European war will accelerate the growth of the Russian military-industrial complex, but at least slow down the growth of the "civilian" economy. Consequently, in theory, it will increase Russia's dependence on the supply of some American goods, sanctions on which it will be advantageous for the US to lift. After this war ends (all wars end someday), it will be necessary to restore what was destroyed. And here American companies will be right there. Of course, along with the same American dollar.
The scenario "Russia will no longer let the US into Europe" that you mentioned is also certainly not excluded (and in my strictly personal opinion, this is exactly what will happen). But today's US leaders seem to work according to the principles "nothing ventured, nothing gained", "war will write off everything" (including US debts :).

[Conjurer]

Please explain the well-known preparation of the European elites, whom the US twists and turns as it pleases, for war with Russia.

There are two components here. The short-term one is that the US is still negotiating with Russia and I suspect that it is not so much about Ukraine as about the fate of US bases in Eastern Europe and the participation of Eastern European countries in NATO. They use hysteria as an argument in the negotiations - like what about us, but they are afraid and do not want to. The long-term one is that the US wants to isolate Europe as its protectorate not only from China, but also from Russia, in order to keep this market exclusively for itself. For this, a terrible enemy is needed, hence the hysteria - to instill fear in its population. Now it is not very afraid, somehow does not believe that the Russians will attack.

A major European war will accelerate the growth of the Russian military-industrial complex, but at the very least will slow down the growth of the "civilian" economy.

)))) Slowing down the growth of the civilian economy is Nabiullina's task and it has been solved for a long time, but the military-industrial complex has nowhere to grow, all capacities are used, now only a gradual increase in production is possible due to automation, modernization, construction of new capacities, i.e. not quickly. And we cannot fight Europe with conventional weapons now, it is too expensive, we will not be able to afford it. We will be talking about a couple of strikes with conventional ammunition to demonstrate that the jokes are over, and then tactical nuclear weapons will be used against military bases and the military-industrial complex, if it does not come to that again. It is tough, but we have no choice.
That is, we do not foresee any curtailment of civilian life, because Russia is not the USSR, civilian life is a private production and does not switch to military footing by order.

[DO]

Russia is not the USSR, the citizen is a private enterprise, it does not switch to military rails by order.

Rails are military, so you can cross them on command.
Regarding “private production”, many strategic enterprises from the USSR era, which have not yet been put into development, need to be restored and, if necessary, nationalized in one way or another.

[Conjurer]

Rails are military, so you can cross them on command.

Germany surpassed the USSR in industrial potential (especially considering its satellites), but lost the war against the USSR's industry. Why? Because the USSR had a socialist form of production - i.e. all production was state-owned, while Germany had a capitalist form. That says it all. Private production is not managed by order, no one has ever managed that.
Regarding restoration - what could be restored has already been restored. This can be judged by the reduced growth rates of production volumes in the military-industrial complex, which means that extensive methods of expanding production (i.e. by expanding production areas) have already been exhausted, and only intensive ones remain - automation, optimization, re-equipment - on existing areas.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

Germany surpassed the USSR in industrial potential (especially considering its satellites), but lost the war against the USSR's industry. Why? Because the USSR had a socialist form of production - i.e. all production was state-owned, while Germany had a capitalist form. That says it all. Private production is not managed by order, no one has ever managed that.

We ask Yandex how many aircraft were produced during the Great Patriotic War in the USSR and Germany.
USSR: "from January 1, 1939 to June 22, 1941, the Air Force received 17 combat aircraft from industry"
Germany: "There is information that during the war Germany produced about 100 thousand aircraft."

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

And we can’t fight Europe with conventional weapons now, it’s too expensive, we can’t afford it.

Today in the SVO, against the Russian army on the side of 40-million Ukraine, the entire collective West, led by the USA, is in fact fighting. Financing, weapons supplies, training of the Ukrainian Armed Forces personnel, provision of intelligence information from satellite systems, AWACs and globalhawks, satellite communications from Starlink, supply of mercenaries from all over the world and "vacationers" - NATO specialists.
They pulled it off - Russia is slowly but surely winning, otherwise there would be no negotiations with the USA.
A possible war between Russia and the entire European NATO, especially with the very likely hidden participation of the USA, is of course on a different scale. But even today Russia is far from being fully mobilized for war.

We will be talking about a couple of strikes with conventional ammunition to demonstrate that the jokes are over, and then tactical nuclear weapons will be used against military bases and the military-industrial complex, if things don't work out again. It's tough, but we don't have a choice.

In Europe, nuclear weapons are not a panacea. Using strategic nuclear weapons against neighbors is madness. In purely military terms, TNW are effective today only at sea. On European land, the effectiveness of TNW is low today - the NMD has taught opposing armies to disperse their forces and resources. In addition, there is no military victory without infantry. And driving your guys through terrain contaminated with TNW is not the best solution.

[Conjurer]

Today in the SVO, against the Russian army on the side of 40-million Ukraine, the entire collective West is in fact fighting

Misconception. There is a four-fold difference between "supplying weapons" and "fighting". In the sense that when they themselves actually have to fight, the flow of weapons will be four times greater, and we cannot afford this economically and technically now (i.e., there simply won't be enough military production).

then tactical nuclear weapons will be used against military bases and the military-industrial complex, if things don't work out again

Firstly, we are talking about a one-time (or two-time, if it doesn't work out) disarming strike - at the bases of the Armed Forces, then at the main enterprises of the military-industrial complex. There is no talk of any mass contamination of the area, this is a tactical weapon, it is used locally, local and the contamination is small. Secondly, the population of Europe is not ready to fight, or rather does not see the point in it, only some politicians want to fight, and with someone else's hands, so, most likely, a couple of strikes with conventional weapons will be enough to sober up, just to demonstrate the intent.
Thirdly, we don't have enough forces to march through Europe again if a real war with it starts, so the only option for us then is to simply burn everything strategically. Again - there is no choice, either this way or not at all.

[DO]

Quote: Conjurer

when they themselves actually have to fight, the flow of weapons will be four times greater, and we cannot handle this economically and technically now (i.e., we simply won’t have enough military production).

At four? Your average ceiling estimate is too modest. You should have written not at four, but at twenty-four :)))
Regarding the fact that the possibilities of military mobilization of Russian industry have been exhausted, you are again passing off wishful thinking as reality.
However, any statements, both mine and yours, are subjective and cannot be proven on this page.

Quote: Conjurer

we are talking about a single (or double, if it doesn't work out) disarming strike - on the places where the Armed Forces are based, then on the main enterprises of the military-industrial complex. There is no talk of any mass contamination of the area, this is a tactical weapon, it is used locally, local and contamination, and of a small magnitude.

Are you personally ready to volunteer for a unit that will break through the site of a nuclear strike?
Simply an exchange of strikes of TNW in Europe is a dream of the Americans. But it does not make much sense for either Russia or European countries. Because conventional weapons can achieve the same result. Conventional versions of Oreshnik, among others.

Quote: Conjurer

we don't have enough strength to march through Europe again if a real war with it starts

Well, here you are again, passing off your wishful thinking as reality.

Quote: Conjurer

so the only option for us then is to simply burn everything strategically.

A cynical but sane person could only give such advice from overseas.
With this I bid you farewell, may you be healthy.

[DO]

P.S. Although of course "partners again" can strike the Russian coast with drones and cruise missiles from the land of Alaska in large numbers. Because the distance to them is not great.

[savage3000]

There is no way. There is no MiG-41. For long-range interception we have Su-35 and Su-57 with radars that can hit at 400 km.

What the fleet needs is a single-engine fighter with a radar from the Su-35 and one new engine for the Su-57. Low-observability.

Even the richest country can't afford a bunch of heavy itsiebitels. In the US, the basis is the F-16. But it's quite heavy.

[DO]

Quote from Savage3000

There will be no such thing. There is no MiG-41. For long-range interception we have Su-35 and Su-57 with radars that can hit at 400 km.

You are right about one thing - talk about resuming production of the modernized MiG-31 may remain just talk. And then, apart from the option you have outlined, there is no other.

What the fleet needs is a single-engine fighter with a radar from the Su-35 and one new engine for the Su-57. Low-observability.

Since there are practically no aircraft carriers in the Russian Navy, you obviously mean coastal aviation.
Why all this exotic stuff that doesn't exist and nobody knows when it will be? What's wrong with Su-35/30 + S-70?

[acetophenone]

If the design bureau has not produced a single aircraft in over two decades, then that's it. It's not meant to be.

[acetophenone]

If the design bureau has not produced a single aircraft in over two decades, then that's it. It's not meant to be.

[v3v3v344]

I welcome your common sense. Better late than never. Thanks to the thieving one.
enemy and his f22, 35. Helped to understand simple things. Rising prices of weapons will inevitably start a new round, but from our side it is forced to be many times more effective. Of course, under the condition of a more interested in achieving the natural goals of the Motherland management layer.

[loha]

we simply can't restore production of the AN-2, they keep sawing up the money. and you're talking about the MIG, KB which practically doesn't exist, and there are hardly any aircraft factories left, and they're seriously overloaded... so there's no harm in dreaming, but under the current system it's not realistic

[spyder100]

What is most surprising is that in the materials on aviation topics on VO, the object shown several times in the form of a model is for some reason considered an airplane and even a fighter, they assign it some place in the structure of the VKS and even manage to break spears about its performance characteristics. We are talking about the so-called "Su-75". The material about the MIG-41, which is not even presented in a model, has approximately the same value.
Recently, there have been quite a lot of materials on VO about "spherical horses in a vacuum".

[DO]

The material about the MIG-41, which is not even presented in the model, has approximately the same value.
Recently, there have been quite a lot of materials on VO about "spherical horses in a vacuum"

I agree with you about all the previous media materials about the MiG-41. Like it will be a spaceship, and a reaper, and a player on the pipe, and a good guy in battle. Plus awesome pictures of the Pepelats with a gravitsapa hidden in their ass.
However, the article under discussion is about something completely different - in fact, it proposes modern modernization and restoration of production of MiG-31, in the shortest possible time. If such a decision is accepted for implementation, isn't that wonderful?

[Prometey]

So far, all that Putin's Russia has been able to do is create "unique" single units for parades. And the entire burden of the war is being carried by old Soviet developments from 40 years ago.

[Ivan 1980]

What does Putin have to do with it? You've had enough: Putin is the president and he is the executive branch. He doesn't issue laws, he adopts them, i.e. signs them.

[Prometey]

Quote: Ivan 1980

What does Putin have to do with it?

Yes, of course, it has nothing to do with it. Russia is a sort of semi-presidential republic, where the system of power is essentially built by the head of state. And the key people in this executive power are selected by the president. Well, if for you the Shoigis and Chubais are not the president's team, then the question is - what does he actually do?

[Ivan 1980]

Read the Constitution to find out what power the president has: executive or legislative.

[Prometey]

Are you an idiot or are you pretending?

[Iris]

Exactly. Only the head of the executive branch himself elects. And appoints. And not only the legislative branch, but also the judicial branch. It's a sin to remember the fourth one.

[Ivan 1980]

He signs the appointments, if the upper or lower house does not give the document, he will not appoint anyone.

[futurohunter]

Another illiterate article. Nothing more to say about it

[Kuziming]

Our old problem: waiting for the wonder weapon:
- Partially a fantasy project without a clear roadmap;
- Absence of a key functional unit, in this case the engine;
- The need to use materials with properties that do not currently exist, and there is no roadmap for obtaining them (alloys, for example);
- Precision of parts processing that is unattainable with existing machine tools:
- Lack of our own machine park, dependence on imported technologies, vulnerability to sanctions;
- Problems with engineers and skilled workers;
- Inability to invest money in long-term projects, problems with financial control.

Instead of spending years developing various types of wonder weapons, it makes sense to:
1. Concentrate on the key link - microelectronics.
2. Develop and mass-produce cheap models based on existing materials (for example, plywood drones based on WW2 models).
3. Based on existing groups, develop the production of working models, help them with machines, personnel, and loans.

[Iris]

The division of opinions in the comments is indicative, even to the point of being directly opposite. Meanwhile, it seems to me that the situation as a whole is depressing. It is no longer possible to seriously talk about the Russian Armed Forces being second in the world. Not second. And not tenth. The fourth year of attempts to liberate the DPR, which is legally declared territory of the Russian Federation, is too much. I will not talk about the Kursk province. And do not say that fifty countries are actually fighting against us. During the Entente, foreign troops were in Murmansk, Vladik and many other places. No need to talk about nuclear weapons either - we will never use them. The first - our conscience will not allow it, and the second - we will not have time. No need to talk about Oreshnik either. In the end, it was beautiful in flight, but there is no information about the results of the strike. But suddenly it turns out that the BMP-3 is no big deal, and the submarine - the sailors will say it better (or rather, they won't say it, because), and articles about the MiG-41 in the current situation in the MiG Design Bureau can only be spoken about through tears. But graduates of the balalaika and accordion faculties everywhere continue to insist that we will throw our hats at them. The worst thing is the lack of competent analysis of the objective picture, recognition of mistakes and the adoption of emergency measures to correct them. The belief that it will dissolve and the English Channel will also be ours is a mental dysfunction - And those who are still capable of doing this will not give birth to more. They have different interests, priorities and vision of life. Many of them do not understand at all - what kind of SVO is this, what kind of SVO is this...