Latest news about the future of interceptor aircraft

93
An important element of the Russian air defense system is the MiG-31 interceptor aircraft. This aircraft has been in operation since the early eighties and is still capable of demonstrating high performance and great capabilities. However, the production of this technology stopped in the early nineties, and over time, the aircraft began to become obsolete. In this regard, in recent days, a number of reports have appeared about the future of domestic interceptor aircraft, primarily about the MiG-31.



On August 8, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin visited Nizhny Novgorod aviation Sokol plant, which had previously built MiG-31 aircraft, but is now repairing and upgrading them. The official called this interceptor unique and unparalleled, but at the same time having prospects. According to Rogozin, the MiG-31 will remain in service for at least 15 years in new versions that meet the requirements of the time. In addition, the Deputy Prime Minister believes that the serial construction of the MiG-31 interceptors should be restored. He emphasized that this opinion was expressed at the hearings in the State Duma and received support from the military department, the Military Industrial Commission and specialized industrial enterprises.

It should be noted that the future of the MiG-31 aircraft has been repeatedly discussed in various instances. One of the results of such discussions was the current program of equipment modernization. In accordance with the existing plans, up to 2020 will be repaired and upgraded by the MiG-31BM project, 60 aircraft from approximately 250, which are in the air force, will pass. The further fate of the MiG-31 aircraft is still unknown, but suggestions are being made about the possible continuation of upgrading technology or the appearance of a new modernization project.

Regardless of plans for the distant future, the existing interceptors MiG-31 will continue to carry out their tasks. On Monday, Air Force Commander Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev confirmed the high ability of MiG-31 aircraft to intercept various air targets. These capabilities were recently again demonstrated during the Air Force and Air Defense exercises at the Ashuluk training ground in the Astrakhan Region.

In addition, Bondarev told about training flights, the purpose of which was to determine the capabilities of the equipment. So, with two refueling interceptor MiG-31 was able to reach the 82-th parallel. The plane had a safety margin, but it was decided not to risk the machine and the pilots. In the course of further training flights, it is planned not only to fly over the Polar region again, but also to reach the North Pole. In this way, the MiG-31 will demonstrate its ability to act in high latitudes.

Despite the high performance, in the future, the MiG-31 will have to be replaced. The Air Force Command already has certain plans for this. According to Colonel-General V. Bondarev, the development of a promising long-range interception aviation system, which will replace the similar system based on the MiG-31 aircraft, will start in 2017 year. To carry out all the necessary work will take several years.



For obvious reasons, the exact timing of the program is not yet known, but the Air Force Command has already made an approximate schedule of work. So, in 2017, research works will begin, during which the appearance of the prospective aircraft and the technical requirements for it will be determined. Deliveries of serial cars to the troops can begin as early as 2025. Other details of the plans have not yet been announced.

Based on the available information on the tactical niche of existing MiG-31 aircraft, one can make some assumptions about a promising interceptor, the development of which will begin at the end of the current decade. Obviously, it will have to, interacting with the ground elements of the interception complex (radar and controls), attack enemy aircraft and cruise missiles at a greater distance from the protected objects and areas.

It should be noted that the development of a promising long-range aviation intercept system will be one of the most complex recent projects in the field of aviation and air defense. The fact is that in addition to the interceptor aircraft, the complex will include weapons (air-to-air missiles, probably of long range), ground components (radar stations, data transmission and control systems), as well as a number of auxiliary systems, for example, airborne early warning and control aircraft. Thus, not only aircraft manufacturers and aircraft equipment developers, but also a number of other organizations from other branches of the defense industry will be involved in the project work.

Creating such complexes is an extremely difficult task, which is why even at the peak of its power, our country was able to develop only a few such systems. The latest of these was a complex based on the MiG-31 interceptor. At present, the modernization of this aircraft continues, but to significantly improve the characteristics of the complex, the development of completely new systems is required. Such a project is a serious challenge for the Russian defense industry. Its implementation will show the full potential of not only the aircraft industry, but also other industries.


On the materials of the sites:
http://ria.ru/
http://itar-tass.com/
http://vz.ru/
http://lenta.ru/
Our news channels

Subscribe and stay up to date with the latest news and the most important events of the day.

93 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +17
    13 August 2014 09: 29
    Still, our aircraft, in addition to flight characteristics, are good because they are always ready to fly in any climatic zones.
    1. +10
      13 August 2014 09: 34
      you only need to manage to upgrade on time.
    2. +9
      13 August 2014 09: 41
      Our planes are still good in that they have the possibility of further modernization of both avionics and weapons.
      1. FID
        +40
        13 August 2014 10: 22
        Quote: Thought Giant
        Our planes are still good in that they have the possibility of further modernization of both avionics and weapons.

        Since I am connected with avionics - such a potential has always been laid that it was enough for several decades. Regarding the Mig-31 - a new avionics with a glass cabin has already been developed, tested and flown for it!
        1. -10
          13 August 2014 10: 23
          PHOTO TO STUDIO)))) Unless of course this is not a state secret.
          1. FID
            +7
            13 August 2014 10: 55
            Quote: PROXOR
            PHOTO TO STUDIO))))

            I am deeply sorry ....
          2. +6
            13 August 2014 16: 08
            Hmm))

            Why are you so!

            Navigator's cabin


            The cockpit
        2. +6
          13 August 2014 10: 48
          Even the Americans decided to upgrade their F-15, although earlier they wanted to remove them in favor of the raptor
          1. +12
            13 August 2014 17: 30
            Quote: insafufa
            Even the Americans decided to upgrade their F-15, although earlier they wanted to remove them in favor of the raptor

            The fact is that the MiG-31 and F-15 were the first aircraft systems with a phased array. But unlike Igla, our MiGar intercepted the VTS at a distance of 90 (!) Km back in the early 300s, which earned the President's gratitude. So the amers had to push their strength and give birth to the "Phoenix" but the range is 120 km ... the truth is easier than ours.
            And after the modernization "31" began to see goals against the background of the earth, even to work on some of them. Still, a 9t load is something with something.
            1. +3
              15 August 2014 01: 54
              Quote: Boa constrictor KAA
              our MiGar intercepted the CC at a distance of 90 (!) km, at the beginning of 300's,

              Eeee ... and when and who intercepted something on 300km, and most importantly what?
              1. Shield = on 200km, and then goals like B1-B (something around 20 ESR)
              2. Shield-M is on 320km, but the troops began enter 2008
              3. Long-range missile launcher R-33 for 160 km (under the sweetest conditions)
              4. UR bd R-37 yes at 320 km (again under the sweetest conditions), but its carrier is the MiG-31BM, so it has: In 2008, the first stage of the GSE was completed, the second stage in 2012.

              What are the "early 90s"?

              MiG-31BM will be equipped with new long-range missiles summer 2013 of the year.

              Russian fighter aircraft will significantly increase its strike power. This will happen with the adoption of the MiG-31BM interceptor for K-37M long-range air-to-air missiles. A high-ranking source on the Main Command of the Air Force told Izvestia that these missiles were fully debugged at the Moscow-based engineering design bureau (ICB) Torpov’s Vympel and the aviators are waiting for it by next summer.

              - The new missiles will be armed with a modernized MiG-31BM, our main interceptor. This “long arm” is capable of hitting high-speed aerial targets at a distance of about 200 km, the officer said.

              =========
              http://www.niip.ru/upload/press/2013/statia3.pdf
              1. badger1974
                0
                15 August 2014 14: 39
                how to tell you. Well, something like that.
                target detection time (this includes identification), and the time of setting target parameters in the BCU, although it’s seconds, you should take into account the cruising mode of the MiG-31 2500 km per hour (roughly 700 m per second) plus the launch of the R-33 4 with something thousand kilometers per hour (about 1200 m per second), the work from detection to the very last target of the MiG-31 system is exactly 300 km, and with confident capture of the target just in the area of ​​the same 300 km
                1. +2
                  16 August 2014 02: 00
                  Quote: badger1974
                  Well, something like this.

                  Uh-huh.
                  1. Intercept aerial target (
                  Quote: BoA KAA
                  Our MiGar back in the early 90's made interception VTS at a distance of 300 (!) km

                  PVC -the flight of fighter aircraft to meet and attack an air enemy on the approaches to the object being covered. Carried out from the position of duty at the airport or on duty in the air.
                  made (carried out) - means destroyed (at least conditionally)

                  2.
                  Quote: badger1974
                  moreover, with a confident capture of the target, just in the zone of the same 300 km

                  ?
                  What was discovered, then the interceptor (P-33) at a distance 300km, fIf the "barrier" DETECTES B-1B only 200 km (in the SWEET mode itself: MIG-31 at maximum height, B-1В too, perfect weather conditions) ???????????
                  3 .. Long range P-33 on 160 km: maximum carrier height (more correctly cruising) + cruising speed
                  ?
                  And the person APPROVES: was implemented in 90
                  1. badger1974
                    0
                    16 August 2014 02: 26
                    easily, if you recall that the Mig-25 after launching the R-40 could have been engaged in a different purpose, and for what fright, it was from the near-air defense point
                    and R-33 in the screening system can pick up Dryers which may not even include a detection system. infa code fells on the ILS-correct and that's it
                    Well, if the screening is all 400 km
                    there are no questions, the whole importance in the ability to work with equipment, here is just a boom, loss of skills
                2. 0
                  19 August 2014 12: 36
                  2500 - cruising is it true? I'm not a specialist, but I wanted to clarify: 2500 km / h without afterburner ??? belay
                  1. 0
                    26 August 2014 08: 30
                    fighters of those years, almost all for 1 move could not leave without the inclusion of afterburner. and 2500 km / h is 2 mach at least (depending on altitude)
        3. +2
          13 August 2014 10: 50
          Hurray! Will they enter the series or will they scratch their turnips again?
        4. +3
          13 August 2014 11: 25
          Quote: SSI
          Since I am connected with avionics - such a potential has always been laid that it was enough for several decades. Regarding the Mig-31 - a new avionics with a glass cabin has already been developed, tested and flown for it!

          Consequently, the modernization of this aircraft is already worked out in detail? Then carrying out it is possible as soon as possible subject to appropriate funding. These birds are in service with us and, in my opinion, in Kazakhstan.
          Now it is planned to modernize 60 aircraft, even 40 will remain in their previous modifications, and about a hundred and a half that they plan to write off? Is it really impossible to upgrade them too? A new aircraft of this class in service in real quantities can only arrive by the year 30, but what about this?
          It remains only to upgrade existing and release new ones. In the USSR there were more than 400. How much do we need now?
          1. FID
            +13
            13 August 2014 11: 33
            Quote: andj61
            Consequently, the modernization of this aircraft has already been worked out in detail?

            That's right ... How much is needed? I’m a practitioner, I teach planes to fly, I don’t deal with strategies and politics with finances. I don’t know, I know one thing - our aircraft industry is in a CATASTROPHIC position.
            1. +2
              13 August 2014 23: 01
              Quote: SSI
              I don’t know, I know one thing - our aircraft industry is in a CATASTROPHIC position.


              ... And since 1992, at least ... Maybe the sanctions on Dobrolet with its Boeings will still push the rulers to revive the domestic aircraft industry?
        5. +3
          13 August 2014 11: 44
          Quote: SSI
          Regarding the Mig-31 - a new avionics with a glass cabin has already been developed, tested and flown for it!

          Hello Sergey. I would like to know your opinion on the resumption of production of new Mig-31 machines or still carry out modernization and develop a new interceptor.
          1. FID
            +15
            13 August 2014 11: 59
            Quote: saturn.mmm
            Hello Sergey. I would like to know your opinion on the resumption of production of new Mig-31 machines or still carry out modernization and develop a new interceptor.

            Hello Mikhail! The MiG-31 is an amazing machine. There are simply no analogues. No "Blackbirds" were standing nearby. They will modernize and it will still serve. But a decision has already been made on the PAK DP (a promising long-range intercept aviation complex). We have very strange people (to say the least) are engaged in aviation. First, they destroy the design bureau, then they collect the remains into some conglomerates and design various PAKs.
            1. +12
              13 August 2014 12: 09
              Quote: SSI
              We have very strange people (to say the least) who are involved in aviation

              Greetings, dear Sergey! Not just aviation ...
            2. +4
              13 August 2014 12: 33
              Quote: SSI
              At first, the design bureau is destroyed, then the remains are collected into certain conglomerates and various PAKs are designed.

              Do you think that, at this time, the creation of a decent Mig-31, a new interceptor is unlikely? Mig-31 was built about 500 pieces, say 250 left alive, if you upgrade this amount, is this enough? Something is not heard about PAK FA, maybe you know how the program is progressing?
              1. FID
                +7
                13 August 2014 12: 38
                Quote: saturn.mmm
                Something is not heard about PAK FA, maybe you know how the program is progressing?

                To my great regret ... Of the current military - only the Yak-130 is in my service. I don’t do small things ...
                1. +2
                  13 August 2014 13: 31
                  Quote: SSI
                  To my great regret ... Of the current military - only the Yak-130 is in my service. I don’t do small things ...

                  Sorry. I was hoping to learn something from you how the tests are progressing.
                  In Russia, if it is quiet, it means either very good or very bad.
                  I wonder how the Cubans are there, are they satisfied with the Tu-204?
                  1. FID
                    +5
                    13 August 2014 14: 31
                    Quote: saturn.mmm
                    I wonder how the Cubans are there, are they satisfied with the Tu-204?

                    IL-96 and An-148/158 are more attractive to them. 204 one flies, trucks stand, one in reserve ....
                2. +3
                  13 August 2014 13: 53
                  But conclusions are drawn across the industry.
            3. Associate Professor
              +7
              13 August 2014 12: 49
              Quote: SSI
              We have very strange people (to say the least) who are involved in aviation. At first, the design bureau is destroyed, then the remains are collected into certain conglomerates and various PAKs are designed.

              This can be called strangeness, if we proceed from the fact that the tasks of these people included the development of our aircraft industry, machine tool industry, etc. And if we proceed from the fact that their task was to destroy these key industries, then there is nothing strange. As you know, to break - not to build, so it will not be easy to rebuild.
            4. typhoon7
              +5
              13 August 2014 16: 38
              The car is unique, generally amazed at the Soviet backlog. Thanks to him, we also hold on. We should again create design schools, facilities. Crumbling everything is easy, but restoring is problematic, but possible.
        6. +5
          13 August 2014 14: 36
          I haven’t seen you for a long time. It is always interesting to know the opinion of a person who is directly cooked or cooked directly in the kitchen about which he writes.
        7. typhoon7
          +2
          13 August 2014 16: 26
          Your message is very encouraging, a modernized machine can serve the country for a long time. It will be possible to calmly, without any fuss, create a promising complex. But due to recent events in Ukraine and tensions on the western borders, the figure of 60 can be increased three times. It’s good that these cars weren’t destroyed, in the nineties scandals surfaced with the sale of gliders of these aircraft as scrap metal.
    3. +2
      13 August 2014 09: 48
      Russians have something to be proud of!
      1. +9
        13 August 2014 13: 23
        What a passionate forum member!
        To be proud of the past is good, but pride must be created for us and our descendants.
    4. +4
      13 August 2014 11: 34
      Quote: vodolaz
      Still, our aircraft, in addition to flight characteristics, are good because they are always ready to fly in any climatic zones.

      And political.
    5. +1
      13 August 2014 23: 31
      It may be suitable as a high-speed platform for delivering missiles to the launch zone (large borders).
  2. +8
    13 August 2014 09: 39
    Do not touch my complex, it will also serve you after me ...
  3. +6
    13 August 2014 09: 40
    They will be restored using 200 brand new engines stored at the Perm plant, as well as aircraft from storage bases, which are in a rather dire condition. In a word, there will be no production, but will be restored at aircraft repair enterprises. Here are just a question with avionics is not clear. Of course, I would like it to be unified with the PAKFA avionics, but with the radar, which is a development of the "Barrier"
  4. +2
    13 August 2014 09: 41
    From the Don.
    He served in the Air Force in the 70's. and even then it was in service with the MIG-25. It's a BOMB! And the MIG-35 is no worse, and the modernized one !!!!
    1. 0
      19 August 2014 12: 50
      Quote: borisjdin1957
      And the MIG-35 is no worse, and the modernized one - !!!!

      Did you mean the MiG-31?
  5. +5
    13 August 2014 09: 43
    MIG-31 is undoubtedly one of the best interceptors in the world. But all the same, it’s becoming morally obsolete.
    I ask experts for clarification on the following issue: the SU-34 at one time with hanging tanks quietly flew to England. Why it is impossible to make a new interceptor based on it. Double cabin with amenities, good flying qualities. Approximately comparable load that can take one and the second smolt. 2 crew members. Personally, my opinion is that such a platform is ideal. After all, the interceptor does not need to engage in a maneuvering battle (in which, by the way, the SU-34 never fuses, namely, to detect the intruder and launch long-range air-to-air missiles.
    1. +12
      13 August 2014 10: 11
      Not a specialist, but I’ll answer approximately. The MiG-31 was designed as a high-speed and high-speed interceptor fighter, it was he who drove the American intelligence from Kamchatka, he must overtake the strategists on approach. The difference with the Su-34 in engines, layout, goals. Another thing is that they will most likely do on the basis of the T-50, aerodynamics there are suitable for supersonic sound, more powerful engines must be put in and the fuselage must be increased to accommodate additional fuel and long-range missiles + powerful radar to cover a large space. The main problem is in engines, given the current economy, it is desirable to make them unified with other machines, and unification is the enemy of specialization. Mig-31 is not a station wagon, it is a specialist, narrow, but that is why it is so unique.
    2. +7
      13 August 2014 10: 23
      MIG-31, is able to fly at super sound speed (up to 2.5M) for a long time. For this, both engines and a glider are sharpened, using a titat. This is done to allow rapid extension to a long distance to intercept the target at maximum range. SU-34 is a method of a period of time, the main flight mode, as with most combat aircraft, is a subsonic speed of 800-1000 km / h. Promising PAKFA, designed at a speed of about 1400-1500 km / h in mode, without the use of afterburner. So for long-range interception, it is better to MIG-31, while no one has anything.
      1. +2
        13 August 2014 11: 01
        I, too, am not an expert, but the MIG-31 does not go all the way to the super sound. Its cruising speed is exactly the same, 800-1000 km \ h. It will not accelerate to 2,5M, but easily to 1,9-2M. Yet again. No one talks about a complete write-off of 31x. While there is no completely new interceptor, the 31st will be engaged in intercepting fast-flying targets at high altitude. Chasing him for the sake of a civilian-based reconnaissance plane is simply wasteful.
        1. +3
          13 August 2014 11: 35
          The Mig-31 has two cruising speeds: subsonic
          Quote: PROXOR
          I, too, am not an expert, but the MIG-31 does not go all the way to the super sound. Its cruising speed is exactly the same, 800-1000 km \ h. It will not accelerate to 2,5M, but easily to 1,9-2M.

          The MiG-31 has two cruising speeds: subsonic and supersonic. From Wiki;
          Flight characteristics of the Mig-31:
          Maximum allowable speed:
          at low altitude: 1500 km / h;
          at high altitude: 3000 km / h (M = 2,82);
          Cruising speed:
          subsonic: 950 km / h (M = 0,9);
          supersonic: 2500 km / h (M = 2,35);
          Practical range:
          at an altitude of 10000 m, with M = 0,8: 1450 km;
          without refueling with 2 PTB: up to 3000 km;
          with one refueling: up to 5400 km;
          at an altitude of 18000 m, with M = 2,35: 720 km;
          Combat radius: 720 km;
          Flight Duration: up to 3,3 hours;
          Service ceiling: 20600 m

          And it can accelerate to 2,8M.
          1. +1
            13 August 2014 14: 19
            Quote: andj61
            And it can accelerate to 2,8M.

            Does glazing stand this?
            1. +1
              14 August 2014 11: 13
              Quote: saag
              Does glazing stand this?

              According to the recollections of the pilot who operated the MIG-25 in Egypt (I don’t remember the name, but a fairly well-known fact), once he had to accelerate the twenty-fifth to speeds above 3 Machs. The glazing has withstood.
              I don’t understand where the bike came from about the fact that the glazing on the MiG-31 does not withstand the flow. The aircraft was later than the MiG-25, and in those years, technology was not lost, but developed. Therefore, about weak glazing is nonsense. The only option is that it can not withstand after a quarter of a century of age without burnt care and having stress concentrators, from any shock. And most likely this is information from the Western Trolls!
        2. +5
          13 August 2014 14: 02
          I would like to add that the cruising speed of the Mig-31 2.35 to 2.8 accelerates only in the "path" and I want to remind you that with almost all sights, I mean on interceptor aircraft, the main component is the convergence speed, the more it is, the further and the better the sight is seen, this is the answer why the fighter has such an aerodynamic layout. hi
        3. +5
          14 August 2014 00: 02
          Quote: PROXOR
          It will not accelerate to 2,5M, but easily to 1,9-2M

          Why not accelerate?
          I remember in the 80s that one friend drove up to 3,3M - the lamp was brewed, then in KB the engines were studied for a long time for the limit modes.
          And two stars were removed from the intruder ....
    3. FID
      +14
      13 August 2014 10: 29
      Quote: PROXOR
      SU-34 at one time with hanging tanks quietly flew to England. Why it is impossible to make a new interceptor based on it. Double cabin with amenities, good flying qualities.

      You see, DIFFERENT these are airplanes. There is no need to make a front-line fighter-bomber an interceptor. Universalization is not always good .....
      1. -8
        13 August 2014 11: 13
        History knows many examples when the same aircraft performed different tasks. Take at least the same MIG-25. In addition to the interceptor aircraft, he could serve as a scout and work on ground targets. I do not presume to assert, but in my opinion there was a version of a refueling vehicle. And this whole set worked great. Modern multi-purpose fighter SU-27 can perform all functions. In this dispute, we forget one task of the interceptors: barging in the zone of responsibility. And here is not a special glider, not heavy duty engines are not needed. From my point of view, the SU-34 with a set of improvements will turn into an excellent interceptor. Its size allows you to place a good radar station, take a sufficient amount of fuel and missiles. There are 2 people in his crew. The combat radius of the SU-34 is greater, the only thing that the SUshka loses is the maximum speed.
        We will be realistic. By 2022, the replacement of the MIG-31 will not be prepared. Who will close his niche at least in part. That's right: the SU-34, while baraging and the PAK FA, if necessary, quickly go to the area of ​​operations and capture the target until the same SU-34 arrives in the zone.
        1. +7
          13 August 2014 12: 08
          Quote: PROXOR
          Take at least the same MIG-25. In addition to the interceptor aircraft, he could serve as a scout and work on ground targets

          If you mean the ability of MIG-25 to throw unguided bombs from an altitude of 20 km, then you must understand that the accuracy of such bombing will not be better than that of strategic bombers of the Second World War. In general, the city can and will get.
          Quote: PROXOR
          Modern multi-role fighter SU-27 can perform all functions

          Su-27, depending on the modification on the ground, either could not work at all, or it could, but not in such a way that it was of good quality. In general, Su-34 on the earth works much better than Su-27СМ and Su-30.
        2. +9
          13 August 2014 14: 07
          Prokhor, stop writing nonsense. What kind of interceptor from a frotnom bomber is generally not even funny. The 31st grew out of the 25th, which was partially created to intercept the American blackbirds, which in turn flew very fast and high and could not be intercepted by missiles.
        3. +3
          13 August 2014 14: 11
          I disagree with you and that's why, it's like a food processor - everything can be done, but practically nothing, just like in the life of whom do you value more a "narrow" specialist or a multilateral one, therefore, if he is an "interceptor", he should be!
    4. Shapar
      +2
      13 August 2014 12: 33
      The 31st cannot conduct a maneuverable battle - in this regard, it is like an iron with wings. Its element is height and speed - "caught up and destroyed" ... and the su-34 is more powerful as a highly maneuverable attack aircraft - and on the ground it will put missiles with bombs exactly and fight off an attack from the air ... so we both need them)) )
    5. typhoon7
      +6
      13 August 2014 16: 48
      Equipment becomes obsolete, it is changing, the aircraft itself has not been surpassed so far. Also, today you can take the MiG-21 and calmly bring it to the fourth generation, by replacing avionics, the level of electronics today allows you to do this.
      1. badger1974
        0
        15 August 2014 15: 20
        no avionics of the MiG-21 will make at least 4 generations, this legend of front-line aviation of high-speed air combat of the "dog dump" type, having acquired missiles, it loses all its unsurpassedness, if so, then Po-2 with modern avionics will be tough, really not for laughter, EPR in a radar range like a goose (such a bird), IR range can be reduced to nothing, well, there is a legend about the sound, and two suspended R-77 will do things with such a modern avionics and SUS (control and communication systems ) generally a "ghost",
        Legends shouldn’t be fucked up, it’s necessary to respect them, but the MiG-31 is precisely in the theme of today and tomorrow, namely, this is supersonic speed (huge range), and actually the most powerful equipment and load
    6. +1
      13 August 2014 23: 57
      Quote: PROXOR
      MIG-31 is undoubtedly one of the best interceptors in the world. But all the same, it’s becoming morally obsolete.

      Which, sorry place?
      A glider and an engine who have something similar or at least expected?
      The filling can always be changed to a more modern one.

      PySy. Today, four pairs took turns flying at supersonic ...
      Happy!
    7. 0
      19 August 2014 12: 54
      We all know that the su-34 is made on the basis of the su-27.
      In principle, it is not possible to compare the Su-27 and MiG-31. The tasks are radically different. Suksha is more maneuverable but slower.
      Designed to gain air supremacy, i.e. Rubilovo within a certain area of ​​everything and everything.
      MiG is an interceptor, i.e. possessing crazy speed and a ceiling, having a powerful avionics, consisting of 3-4 cars, must hold and control the vast areas of our immense homeland.
      Too huge a difference in the glider, engines, and of course.

      I heard that at one time the MiG-25-Batya 31 either over Africa, or somewhere over the Middle East made 4 swings. even like the cabin melted so that the crowbar was opened)). It was not for nothing that he drove "black sparrows" (I mean SR71)
  6. +1
    13 August 2014 09: 43
    Quote: qwert
    They will restore using 200 brand new engines stored at the Perm plant,

    Why do they write about 60, a couple of engines on an airplane, a couple to it in reserve, it turns out somewhere 50
  7. +1
    13 August 2014 09: 44
    Anyone from the knowledgeable can answer "at least 15 years" of prolongation of operation in the ranks is it a lot or a little?
    1. +3
      13 August 2014 10: 18
      for existing boards a lot (good), for the resumption of mass production a little (bad). It will take up to five years to resume production, the speed of production is more than 20 cars per year, so it would take another five years to produce 100 cars, which will be obsolete and will only serve another 5-7 years. So you need to either look for ways of the deepest modernization (of the F-15/18 type), that is, new radars, electronics, deep modernization of engines (increasing the resource, reducing the cost of flight hours, increasing power). Or already start preparing to replace a well-deserved car, and repair / upgrade old squeezing all the juices out of them, and trying to keep the pilots in high tone and alertness.
    2. FID
      +1
      13 August 2014 10: 34
      Quote: DesToeR
      Anyone from the knowledgeable can answer "at least 15 years" of prolongation of operation in the ranks is it a lot or a little?

      The usual service life - consider: the assigned resource of the aircraft (for "citizens") - 600000 hours, the assigned resource for landings - 10000 cycles. Usually, a passenger plane flies 2000-3000 hours per year, it turns out - 20-30 years. The military has less plaque. Something like this.
    3. badger1974
      0
      15 August 2014 15: 36
      depending on the operating mode, for example; regiments with aces pilots for the 25th and 31st vehicles can be written off after 2000 hours of flight, and on the 25th fogs (engines) changed after 200-300 hours, on 31st blacksmiths (changed three times less) ,
      the second storage base, they are all under the sky, and the steel is destroyed, then if the titanium set is always normal, then the steel cladding suffered all the weather outrages,
      well, something like this, there are no time parameters for such machines, but the operating and storage conditions are different everywhere, unlike the star-striped blackbird (SR-72) - they were sent to the scrap for a long time
  8. +1
    13 August 2014 09: 49
    Despite the high performance, the MiG-31 will have to be replaced in the future
    Of course, it will be necessary to change, but just have something else. And then to ruin such an excellent flight complex with a piggy delight, as alas it happened, a simple matter, but to restore ...
    In the meantime, remember, so as not to make, the previous mistakes and use
    SUCCESSFUL FLIGHTS!
    for an equal number of take-offs and landings!
  9. Corsican
    +1
    13 August 2014 10: 04
    The country needs an interceptor. Preferably a NEW interceptor. Mig 31 is a great car, but it was designed a very long time ago. And to resume production is quite expensive. Not much cheaper than putting a new machine on the conveyor. The only explanation I found for myself is that the interceptors are urgently needed. In the light of recent events, it is clear from whom we are going to protect our airspace. But do we really have so little time left that it isn’t enough to design a new plane?
    1. +1
      14 August 2014 00: 16
      Quote: Korsak
      The country needs an interceptor. Preferably a NEW interceptor. Mig 31 is a great car, but it was designed a very long time ago. And to resume production is quite expensive. Not much cheaper than putting a new machine on the conveyor. The only explanation I found for myself is that the interceptors are urgently needed. In the light of recent events, it is clear from whom we are going to protect our airspace. But do we really have so little time left that it isn’t enough to design a new plane?

      Why new?
      Just to be?
      The existing ones are being restored and modernized, respectively, the equipment has not been destroyed, it is quite possible to restore production.
      The same picture for engines.

      And in order to make a new plane, it will take 15 years under the current conditions.
      And not the fact that it will come out better.
      There are also problems with the new engine - by the 92nd year I was almost ready for testing, but my fate was sad.
      It seems like it is in the warehouse, but it seems like it is no longer ....
  10. +1
    13 August 2014 10: 18
    It's time to work. And so it turns out that no earlier than 2022 aircraft will enter the series. But it is still necessary to survive until 2022.
  11. +4
    13 August 2014 10: 24
    Unfortunately, the war is already going on with us on the next street, not just a little of it ... but what would "design a new plane"decades go by ....
    1. badger1974
      0
      15 August 2014 15: 55
      all right, you say womag, there’s no time to design something like a screen, there’s a rather old but effective MiG-31, you need to focus on the future, and it’s already in space, well, or in a geostationary orbit and higher, Foxhounds are now needed, something like as polite people, benderlogs are also called green men, but there is no difference
  12. +5
    13 August 2014 10: 32
    Quote: qwert
    Of course, I would like it to be unified with the PAKFA avionics, but with the radar, which is a development of the "Zaslon"

    Unification will not help here, nor is it needed. Even the old versions of Zaslon B1.01 could transmit data on the air situation to NZKP in real time and transmit it to other aircraft of the group. The modernized version of "Zaslon-M" generally allows data exchange with any domestic aircraft equipped with stations with PAR and APAR.
    Moreover. The MiG-31M (BM) is capable of performing the work inherent in AWACS aircraft, with accompanying notification of the air / ground situation of any entity capable of receiving such information.
  13. +1
    13 August 2014 11: 28
    Do not know what to do, gathered at the "Falcon" but the plant in my opinion died long ago. In 90-2000 the Indians saved it Mig 21 modernized. Then they wanted to make the Yak 130. And now silence, if anything moves at the plant, it is very quiet and not noticeable. When I was in school like that, planes flew over the house every day. And Rogozin was still waited at 92 plant, I don't know was not.
  14. +1
    13 August 2014 11: 42

    On August 8, Deputy Prime Minister Dmitry Rogozin visited the Sokol Aviation Plant in Nizhny Novgorod, which had previously built MiG-31 aircraft, but is now repairing and modernizing them. The official called this interceptor unique and unparalleled, but at the same time having prospects.

    Currently, the modernization of this aircraft continues, but to significantly improve the characteristics of the complex requires the development of completely new systems.
    what
  15. +2
    13 August 2014 12: 32
    And yet I do not understand why the T-50 is not suitable for the role of interceptor. Different cars, different tasks, different capabilities, I’ve already heard all this, but I haven’t seen any worthy argument. In speed it is slightly inferior to the 31st, with new engines the gap will narrow, is a hundred or two km / h so critical? The PAK FA radar promises to be powerful, and also with AFAR, which the barriers cannot boast of. If you intend to declare the superiority of the Barrier in the detection range - please, give the numbers.
    The exchange of information today does not surprise anyone, and at PAK FA all this will clearly be implemented in the best possible way.
    So, the advantages of the MiG over the T-50 in terms of interception are very doubtful. Despite the fact that the latter remains a clear superiority in stealth, BVB, versatility. To resume production of the 31st there is neither sense nor opportunity. No matter how good the plane was at one time, it is outdated. Spending a lot of money on the resumption of production and the purchase of aircraft, which by the time of their commissioning will remain to serve 5 years until the final obsolescence - squandering.
    What are the benefits of a completely new, developing interceptor? For 30 years, aviation has advanced in avionics, aerodynamics and stealth technologies - all this is embodied in the PAK FA. What advantages over the PAK FA will the new interceptor have, in addition to a couple of very dubious advantages that I wrote about at the beginning?
    In my opinion, the T-50 will be able to fully perform the functions of the 31st, while there will be no need to spend billions of dollars on the development of a new aircraft and the creation of a production line, but instead buy an extra hundred aircraft. The only justified compromise I consider is the creation of an "intercept" modification of the T-50.
    1. FID
      +4
      13 August 2014 12: 41
      What are different tasks? A simple example: is the B-737 needed for a flight from Moscow to Ryazan or An-2?
      1. +1
        13 August 2014 14: 25
        Quote: SSI
        What are different tasks? A simple example: is the B-737 needed for a flight from Moscow to Ryazan or An-2?

        If this is sanitation, then the An-2 is better
        1. FID
          +1
          13 August 2014 14: 59
          Quote: saag
          If this is sanitation, then the An-2 is better

          And if you just carry 20 passengers?
          1. +1
            13 August 2014 17: 49
            Quote: SSI
            And if you just carry 20 passengers?

            it’s unprofitable to drive the 737th for the sake of this, something turboprop is suitable for the An-24 dimension
            1. FID
              +1
              13 August 2014 18: 02
              Quote: saag
              it’s unprofitable to drive the 737th for the sake of this, something turboprop is suitable for the An-24 dimension

              Here, here ... And they are trying to assign the functions of a heavy interceptor to a fighter, even for 5 generations.
      2. 0
        13 August 2014 17: 37
        What do you want to say? What shock capabilities / stealth and so on are not needed for interception tasks?
        1. FID
          +4
          13 August 2014 17: 44
          I don’t want to say anything. Why hang additional functions? There is an interceptor, there is a bomber, there is a truck ... Let us SUPERPEPELATS construct, which EVERYTHING will do.
          1. 0
            13 August 2014 18: 46
            "There is an interceptor, there is a bomber ..." ////

            That's just for all of them together there is no money. sad Not only in Russia,
            and other countries too. Therefore forced to do more
            universal aircraft - but in normal quantities,
            not three a year.
          2. 0
            13 August 2014 21: 27
            And I say, why should a new aircraft be made if an existing one copes with this task. If the T-50 (in my opinion, of course) is capable of fulfilling the tasks of an interceptor, then why not use it like that?
            1. +4
              14 August 2014 01: 15
              Quote: patsantre
              And I say, why should a new aircraft be made if an existing one copes with this task. If the T-50 (in my opinion, of course) is capable of fulfilling the tasks of an interceptor, then why not use it like that?

              It is not necessary to make an idol from the T-50 (which, in fact, is not yet).
              Its name fully defines its specialization: "aviation complex of front-line aviation". Long-range interception tasks are not assigned to him.
              It is possible that he will be able to intercept somewhere and something, but he will definitely do it with lower efficiency than a specialized aircraft.
              Like, you can transport passengers on a truck, and carry bricks in a passenger car. Is it clear now?
    2. +3
      14 August 2014 00: 06
      Counterquestion. And when will the T-50 really be able to fulfill at least its basic functions as a fighter? I mean the timing. The next question. Will the planned (!) Purchase of the number of machines be enough to carry out these tasks, or will their output be increased? What about engines? How long will it take to create this interception system based on the T-50? Or do you believe that this problem can be solved only by hanging the right missiles? And why not go further and create a front-line bomber instead of the Su-34?
      Again, I cannot shake off the impression that many look at the T-50 as a panacea for everything. Why is there such confidence that almost the most important advantage of the "5th" generation should certainly be low visibility (necessarily based on stealth technologies), as well as a "fucking" cockpit, cruising super sound, in short everything that our damned " friends "embodied in their F-22 and are actively trying to implement on the F-35? Yes, I almost forgot. At the same time, there should be incredible versatility!
      Sometime in the mid-50s of the last century in fighter aviation, as the most promising, the concept was adopted, in which air combat was considered a relic of the past, guns are not needed, missiles (aviation) had to determine the outcome of any air battle. In short, speed-height-rocket. And then Vietnam struck. And it turned out that the ultra-modern (at that time) F-4. which are a "phantom" can be quite confused even by the "old" MiG-17. That's when they remembered about the guns, and about maneuverability, and even about camouflage. Why am I? And to the fact that the imaginary advantages of the 5th generation aircraft have not yet been confirmed by any real combat use. Except for virtual battles. And, as for universality, then, in principle, you can hammer nails with a camera.
      1. 0
        19 August 2014 13: 18
        Quote: aviator65
        And when will the T-50 really be able to fulfill at least its basic functions as a fighter?

        They say by the 16th year, but God forbid at 17 can.
        Quote: aviator65
        Will there be enough planned (!) To purchase the number of machines to carry out these tasks also, or will their output still need to be increased

        by 2020 60 cars planned. No one is talking. that they can reduce / increase (I think the first), but after 2020, when they will accept the new GPV, I think they will reorder much more.
        Quote: aviator65
        With engines how to be

        They promise by the 20th year. It seems to me real, although it will be seen.
        Quote: aviator65
        How long will it take to create this interception system based on the T-50?

        but where is it said that the new interceptor will be based on the t-50?
        I heard somewhere (I don’t know if it is true) that the T-50 glider does not quite correspond to the speed of 2.5 M (that is, it is corny underfill) that were declared in the performance characteristics, such as reduced to 2.1 M. I am already silent about 2.8 M on the MiG-31.
        Quote: aviator65
        And why not go further and create a front-line bomber instead of the Su-34?

        why is the su-34 bad? just started to get rid of childhood diseases, is the new ALA already taken for replacement?

        Nobody has any illusions about STELS. It is not for nothing that the T-50 is equipped with external rockets and bombs.
        By the way, why do you need a solid glass cabin? I don’t understand ... probably only affects the strength: there are no seams.

        Fu-35 is generally a "pregnant penguin")))

        Well, there is no VAF at the forum, in case it would have slammed us all - the aviation specialists, having previously turned gray from everything written lol
    3. Hawk2014
      +1
      14 August 2014 08: 42
      Quote: patsantre
      PAK FA all this will be clearly implemented in the best possible way.

      Well, you still need to live up to this to see what this very T-50 (PAK FA) will really be like? what
      Poghosyan, as I understand it, is a great cunning and a great master of fraud. All the latest projects of his company were implemented with a great delay in terms. The price of the products is unknown, but given the fact that Poghosyan was able to actually monopolize the military aircraft industry in Russia, his% profit is probably not bad. It must also be added that comparing a production car, which is the MiG-31, with an experimental aircraft, what the T-50 (PAK FA) is, is an ungrateful and senseless thing.
      Therefore, the restoration of the production of the MiG-31 (or at least the restoration and modernization of the MiG-31 aircraft in storage) has its own reason.
  16. -3
    13 August 2014 12: 33
    The task of stratospheric high-speed interception is no longer very relevant. Firstly, there is no one to intercept, except for satellites. Secondly, radar and rocket technology have gone far ahead. There are compact long-range missiles with ramjet and ARGS.

    IMHO, for the interceptor, a powerful radar, powerful network communications equipment, a long duration and flight range, 2 people crew, a large payload (preferably in the internal compartments or in a half-flooded state), decent average speed, and resistance to electronic warfare equipment remained relevant. High altitude and high maximum speed, as well as radar stealth, are desirable.

    MiG-31 is not very fit. A simplified version of PAK-FA would be useful here. Indeed, of the older generation aircraft, the Su-34 has prospects for alteration if it can steal a more powerful radar and get rid of excess reservation.
    1. +1
      13 August 2014 14: 04
      "The task of stratospheric high-speed interception is no longer very urgent" - maybe, but suborbital and orbital interceptors and missile carriers would be very useful. It is difficult to knock them down because the flight time of the missile to the target is long. The time of combat duty is not several hours, but months. It is much easier to intercept any enemy missiles.
    2. Hawk2014
      0
      14 August 2014 09: 08
      Quote: goose
      The task of stratospheric high-speed interception is no longer very relevant. Firstly, there is no one to intercept, except for satellites.

      Say no one to intercept ... Actually, the MiG-31 was created to intercept cruise missiles (KR). The number of KR and UAVs in service with all the armed forces of the world will only grow. But will there be large-scale air battles of 5th generation fighters similar to the battles of World War II - is this a very big question?
    3. badger1974
      0
      15 August 2014 16: 22
      I will not minus. but you should be reminded that guze remember, the combat radius for Foxhound patrols is 500 km, add 120 to the maximum 300 km, the range of main armament is about 1000 km, in the case of sector patrols, multiply this action safely by 2, and in case of a jump, four, then e, a link of four MiG-31s ​​can carry out patrolling of the borders of the homeland for 4000 km with the operational load of the S-300 ground defense in extremely inaccessible regions (fortunately they are) and in an extremely high reaction to the use of weapons,
      and on the account of the Su-34, it’s worth familiarizing yourself with the design of the Su-34, and indeed, what the designers of 34 would like, there’s no prospect of making a clean P from the FB, because it turns out a complete P, female felts , according to this, the Su-34 is simply a replacement for the Su-24, according to this, the designers made a front-mounted bomber and it cannot be intercepted, and you can forget the prospect of covering the territories with air defense air defense divisions. the union was not under the force, but now all the more so, the result is MiG-31
  17. dzau
    +4
    13 August 2014 12: 49
    Quote: goose
    The task of stratospheric high-speed interception is no longer very relevant. Firstly, there is no one to intercept, except for satellites. Secondly, radar and rocket technology have gone far ahead. There are compact long-range missiles with ramjet and ARGS.

    IMHO, for the interceptor, a powerful radar, powerful network communications equipment, a long duration and flight range, 2 people crew, a large payload (preferably in the internal compartments or in a half-flooded state), decent average speed, and resistance to electronic warfare equipment remained relevant. High altitude and high maximum speed, as well as radar stealth, are desirable.

    MiG-31 is not very fit. A simplified version of PAK-FA would be useful here. Indeed, of the older generation aircraft, the Su-34 has prospects for alteration if it can steal a more powerful radar and get rid of excess reservation.

    Good opinion. Until the moment you decide to bomb slightly.
  18. 0
    13 August 2014 14: 26
    While a new aircraft is being developed, work on which needs to be kicked up every day, this wonderful interceptor, after some modernization, will serve for many more years ..
  19. +2
    13 August 2014 14: 34
    Just a couple of days ago, the topic of MIG31 was already vigorously discussed. http://topwar.ru/55953-v-2017-godu-nachnetsya-razrabotka-zameny-mig-31.html
    Why let her in a circle? So any good business to death you can chat. What is being done with success
  20. 0
    13 August 2014 15: 06
    Then for what purpose do the T-50?
    1. Hawk2014
      +1
      14 August 2014 09: 15
      Quote: bratchanin

      Then for what purpose do the T-50?

      The T-50 is made for two reasons: 1) as a replacement for the Su-27 (just as the Yankees created the F-22 to replace the F-15); 2) for the sake of the prestige of the company M. Poghosyan. It must be shown that Sukhoi is no worse than Lockheed Martin, Boeing and General Dynamics.
  21. Aleksejs Novass
    0
    13 August 2014 15: 09
    People, what’s wrong with the MiG-41 project? request
  22. +2
    13 August 2014 15: 50
    Quote: SSI

    FID


    Today, 11: 33

    ↑ ↓


    Quote: andj61 Consequently, the modernization of this aircraft has already been worked out in detail? Quite right ... How much is needed? I’m a practitioner, I teach planes to fly, I don’t deal with strategies and politics with finances. I don’t know, I know one thing - our aircraft industry is in a CATASTROPHIC position.

    This is just unfortunate! We had to start everything in such a way that now, instead of restoring at least to the level of the beginning of the 90s, we could move ahead of the rest. Thanks to the designers and production workers for being able to put such potential into their offspring.
  23. +1
    13 August 2014 17: 48
    "... There is only a MIG between the past and the future ..."
    My first, (I hope not the last) acquaintance with the MIG-31.
    ... appearing out of nowhere, in the blink of an eye (aka MIG!) he passed in front of the audience, while I snapped the shutter, he disappeared into nowhere, leaving everyone present with a feeling of some kind of mystery. We, according to the program, were all waiting for the takeoff of MIG. 3, such is the continuity of generations! They heard enthusiastic and dissatisfied exclamations, - "... I didn't even have time to point the camera", "Maybe it will come back ..." goodBut alas, he flew away, not promising to return. crying
    PS and the MIG’s engines sound different than the SU-27.
    Novosibirsk July 2014, the sky, my love.
  24. 0
    13 August 2014 17: 52
    In general, information about the plans of the Americans to make the SR-72 skipped like that, his speed was planned close to hypersonic, so the 31st will remain out of business, and in this case
    1. 0
      19 August 2014 13: 25
      Americans - masters only tongue wag. At least their latest developments speak of this. They also have a school of developers rolling in!
  25. 0
    13 August 2014 19: 57
    Question for those in the subject:
    Is it true that now the maximum speed of all flying MiG-31 is limited by the instrument speed of the order of 1600 km / h due to the fatigue of the glazing of lights?
    1. badger1974
      0
      16 August 2014 02: 37
      no matter how, sapphire (such a mineral) is used in glazing, on the cruiser it changes color three times, this is from triperotour. and so, doctors about fatigue, sapphire was a sapphire mineral for billions of years and 340 grams of celsius is simply nothing for it, but 500 grams of C is getting darker. on cooling, again transparent, by the way, such a current mA lamp in the Russian Federation and no where more
  26. Leshka
    +1
    13 August 2014 20: 44
    MIG-31 is a unique aircraft that can change hot wars
  27. Ivan 63
    +2
    13 August 2014 21: 29
    How long can this question be woken up? Do we have an alternative at the moment? No, and therefore, since the "moment" is very difficult, it is necessary to modernize the 31st - the war starts from the air, not the bayonet.
  28. Chestnut
    -3
    13 August 2014 22: 33
    What gentlemen argue about. There is no feeling that everything has already been sold, and the whole PR of the gentlemen from power is for a convenient cut of the budget.
  29. +1
    13 August 2014 23: 11
    An important element of the Russian air defense system is the MiG-31 interceptor

    It is strange that in the early 90s the Americans did not "talk" the Russian leadership to cut the 31st? Apparently there was no time for "demand by supply" ...?
  30. +1
    13 August 2014 23: 33
    Quote: Chestnut
    What gentlemen argue about. There is no feeling that everything has already been sold, and the whole PR of the gentlemen from power is for a convenient cut of the budget.

    Well, even though there are a lot of ties in Georgia, do not cut it all
  31. +1
    14 August 2014 08: 36
    There should be continuity and consistency in everything, developing new ones is paramount, but the good old moments will still serve! Moreover, there is a modernization reserve. We'll cut one thing, and we won't have time to create another. PS I communicated with the former pilots of the AP (Sokol airfield) disbanded on Sakhalin, who flew on the MiG-31. With what longing in their eyes they said: - "Zheka, I really want to fly! The sky dreams at night!" But the guys at that time were not even 40 years old! Their dream was taken away! am
  32. +1
    14 August 2014 11: 16
    Quote: saag
    Does glazing stand this?

    According to the recollections of the pilot who operated the MIG-25 in Egypt (I don’t remember the name, but a fairly well-known fact), once he had to accelerate the twenty-fifth to speeds above 3 Machs. The glazing has withstood.
    I don’t understand where the bike came from about the fact that the glazing on the MiG-31 does not withstand the flow. The aircraft was later than the MiG-25, and in those years, technology was not lost, but developed. Therefore, about weak glazing is nonsense. The only option is that it can not withstand after a quarter of a century of age without burnt care and having stress concentrators, from any shock. And most likely this is information from the Western Trolls!

    About the accuracy of bombing with the MiG-25. It was accurate enough. The discharge was carried out automatically taking into account atmospheric data. I don’t remember the numbers, they can be found, but the KVO was close to the KVO when bombing from medium altitudes on the Su-24
    1. badger1974
      +1
      15 August 2014 16: 38
      the MiG-25 RB had a "bearing", but this is a rare machine, because it is expensive, and due to the fact that the S-300 perfectly took foxbet-type targets, this idea was abandoned, our fog on the fox demanded 30 kg of silver, the fuel was "sharp" , it is worth a lot, so the Fox MiG-25 remained in the interception, but if the grief was a dashing interception
  33. 0
    18 August 2014 21: 02
    Our strategists cannot resist the onslaught of the State Duma and cannot make a choice, "what is needed." For every non-short-range aircraft there is its own DLRO and its own surface-to-air and air-to-air missiles. By the way, the DLRO A50 has a detection range of 300-650 km. In reality, this is probably not the limit. And stationary type DON 2M ?. They crumple, because there is a question of overcoming the enemy's radar and missile defense - by an Airplane or a Rocket? Or by a cruise missile? Because if you are shot, 3,3m will not help. Therefore, it would be good to equip the MIG 31 with Beauty 4.
  34. 0
    23 August 2014 14: 04
    This hat is A. He doesn’t see the KR ... And it’s easy to blink ...
  35. 0
    4 January 2015 21: 44
    Sorry, but I will do my bit to praise 31! This is the only aircraft, at least from domestic ones, whose flight at above sound speed is limited only by the amount of fuel! Neither the T-50 nor the Su-34 are capable of this, even the modern T-50 is designed for a 40-minute flight, at extra sound. I will modestly keep silent about the fact that individual modifications 31 are capable of shooting down satellites, but in a possible war, this is not an unimportant fact, given the American B-37, which can strike from space, according to one of the press versions. So, while there is no alternative, and it is not yet known what is being designed there, otherwise it will turn out like with the "Armata", the money has been spent, but there is no tank, and no one knows what will happen to it in the future, so it is worth restoring ... at least that which is and flies than wait for the crane in the sky!

"Right Sector" (banned in Russia), "Ukrainian Insurgent Army" (UPA) (banned in Russia), ISIS (banned in Russia), "Jabhat Fatah al-Sham" formerly "Jabhat al-Nusra" (banned in Russia) , Taliban (banned in Russia), Al-Qaeda (banned in Russia), Anti-Corruption Foundation (banned in Russia), Navalny Headquarters (banned in Russia), Facebook (banned in Russia), Instagram (banned in Russia), Meta (banned in Russia), Misanthropic Division (banned in Russia), Azov (banned in Russia), Muslim Brotherhood (banned in Russia), Aum Shinrikyo (banned in Russia), AUE (banned in Russia), UNA-UNSO (banned in Russia), Mejlis of the Crimean Tatar People (banned in Russia), Legion “Freedom of Russia” (armed formation, recognized as terrorist in the Russian Federation and banned)

“Non-profit organizations, unregistered public associations or individuals performing the functions of a foreign agent,” as well as media outlets performing the functions of a foreign agent: “Medusa”; "Voice of America"; "Realities"; "Present time"; "Radio Freedom"; Ponomarev; Savitskaya; Markelov; Kamalyagin; Apakhonchich; Makarevich; Dud; Gordon; Zhdanov; Medvedev; Fedorov; "Owl"; "Alliance of Doctors"; "RKK" "Levada Center"; "Memorial"; "Voice"; "Person and law"; "Rain"; "Mediazone"; "Deutsche Welle"; QMS "Caucasian Knot"; "Insider"; "New Newspaper"