PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

I just tried to find a ordonated priority things must be done whit invisible planes. First must see them after that you must have a capable missile and same importance speed for own planes in order to hit and run from him.

Point is when light cameras will see as far as a radar the invisible on radar would be inutil.

Radar waves can be bounced around the curve of the earth... light waves can't.

Plus certain things block light waves like cloud which are easy to hide behind or even a case where a B-52 is flying away from you it will obscure its presence with its own engine exhaust smoke...

Light is passive so you can look without being noticed. IR is also passive and has similar advantages. radar is active and sometimes that is bad but sometimes it is the best choice... of course keep in mind that a huge powerful long range radar perhaps operating on the ground can detect targets a very long way away and pass that information on to the entire air defence structure so with emitting from one source the entire air defence network will know where certain enemy assets are... add passive sensors and space and sea based sensors and even a few aircraft based sensors and you build up a richer more accurate picture of the enemy while they only detect active emitters and get a much less detailed picture of you.

point is in order to stop him hit your base you need a fast rocket too and a good radar to see invisible planes. Otherwise he would just ignore the interceptor and go ahead to your base and hit it.

If you can divert an enemy aircraft to attack you instead of the target you are defending then that is actually a win for you. The interceptors job is to defend your airspace and if you make the enemy aircraft divert from its proper target and chase after you then that is great... lead him over a radar silent S-400 battery and smoke him...

And the interceptor can get enemy position from ground troops from his back? I mean if the enemy is far away the interceptor can communicate whit no worry whit own troops. And that far away advantave is given by your radar power.

Very true. One on one is a huge advantage to the attacker... because they pick the time and place, but with a whole network the defender has the support of a range of other aircraft including... if necessary... PAK FA and Su-35S and MiG-35S and S-500 and S-400 batteries.

Low flying weapons like stealthy cruise missiles can be engaged with Verba MANPADS and Pantsir-S and Tunguska and TOR type vehicles if they happen to be in the flightpath of the threats and get adequate warning of their approach...

First must see them after that you must have a capable missile and same importance speed for own planes in order to hit and run from him.

Because of the situation... ie the northern frontier of Russia, any F-22 present will be trying to minimise fuel burn and maximise speed to increase its range and combat persistance so it will be super cruising everywhere in the hope that will give it longer range and a missile launch advantage against its enemies.

Problem is that all the advantages it gets from super cruising like altitude and speed go away when confronted with even todays MiG-31 because even todays MiG-31 will be flying higher and much faster with missiles with a much greater range.

the only real advantage is that the radar guided missiles of both aircraft will have problems detecting stealth aircraft but little problem detecting and tracking the MiG.

Of course the EW upgrade of the current MiGs should make that a non issue and it should be able to defend itself against AMRAAM.

the real question is what range will the MiG-31 detect a super cruising F-22 using IRST and radar with the accuracy needed to get an R-37M close enough for its radar to get a lock.

It also depends on whether they are adapting IIR guidance to their larger AAMs for use against stealthy enemy aircraft... it would be useful against F-22s and B-2s.

Why is the MiG-31's current wing type unsuitable for hypersonic flight?

It was optimised for the job the MiG-31 does.

To do it at twice the speed would be more easily done with a new design.

Wasn't there talk about a long range, high speed interceptor to replace the MiG-31 in the long run Berkut?

Ivan the Colorado wrote:Wasn't there talk about a long range, high speed interceptor to replace the MiG-31 in the long run Berkut?

Yes, there were. I hope MiG could use its MiG-1-44 concept to develop it.

medo wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:Wasn't there talk about a long range, high speed interceptor to replace the MiG-31 in the long run Berkut?

Yes, there were. I hope MiG could use its MiG-1-44 concept to develop it.

At that point, why not just take back the design for the J-20 from China and make some improvements from there?

Ivan the Colorado wrote:

medo wrote:

Ivan the Colorado wrote:Wasn't there talk about a long range, high speed interceptor to replace the MiG-31 in the long run Berkut?

Yes, there were. I hope MiG could use its MiG-1-44 concept to develop it.

At that point, why not just take back the design for the J-20 from China and make some improvements from there?

MiG-31 replacement will not be a stealth plane, but fast plane with long range. Of course it will have lower RCS than MiG-31 and maybe better maneuverability, what MiG-1-44 could provide together with long range as it is quite big plane with large wings for a lot of fuel. We will see, if MiG will develop replacement from the start or they will shorten its development using MiG-1-44, which have flying prototype.

Wasn't there talk about a long range, high speed interceptor to replace the MiG-31 in the long run Berkut?

The MiG-41...

So far just talk.

Supposed to be a mach 4.2 speed interceptor.

As Medo mentions this new aircraft is an interceptor... its main features are long range and high flight speed.

Stealth is a waste of money... a huge powerful radar, a huge internal fuel tank, a large internal weapon bay for lots of large long range AAMs would be ideal... internal weapons because of low drag rather than low RCS.

In order to maximize the stealth, active radar aka emitter should be turn off, only receiver is functional, and that is not a good thing for air fighter. And stealthy shape means some reduce in aerodynamic shape, maneuverabilty, speed and that means reduce air fight capability.

So far I believe, stealth is more useful for scouter/ground attacker than fighter.

But I believe, at least for the next 2 decades, nothing can outcompete MiG-31 in air to air fighting.

What matters the most is that MiG-41 is in the pipeline  

Commander videoconferencing: Interceptor future will not create before 2019

KRET as always busy

In Russia, we started to create electronic systems for the PAK DP

Viktor wrote:What matters the most is that MiG-41 is in the pipeline  

Commander videoconferencing: Interceptor future will not create before 2019

In English

http://tass.ru/en/russia/813929

MOSCOW, August 12. /TASS/. Research and development for the creation of a new generation long-range interceptor-fighter to replace Russia's MiG-31 will begin no earlier than 2019, the commander in chief of Russia’s Air and Space Forces, Colonel-General Viktor Bondarev said.

GarryB wrote:As far as I know the forward swept wing is ideal for subsonic aircraft but in theory it should also be rather more efficient for high speed flight too.

For those not familiar a very simple explaination is that a straight wing generates more life but also generates more drag. The faster you fly the more drag is created so as you get faster a sweep back of the wing can reduce drag while still generating lift.

the main problem is that sometimes the air does not just flow straight over the wing and with very sharply swept wings the air can flow down the sweep. When it gets to the end of the wing the high pressure air and the low pressure air mix and form a huge vortex that generates parasitic drag.

One solution is the wing in ground effect where short broad wings are used on aircraft that fly very close to the ground so the vortex does not form properly and drag is greatly reduced.

another solution is winglets which reduces but does not eliminate the vortex.

Another solution is wing fences but again these do not eliminate the vortex.

the forward swept wing results in the span wise flow heading towards the wing root instead of the wing tip so the wing tip vortex is practically eliminated as a significant force on the aircraft.

careful design allows the spanwise flow to add to lift by flowing over the lifting body fuselage instead of creating a vortex at the wingtip.

The direct result is an enormous reduction in drag, which means the wing can be made smaller and lighter... which further reduces drag etc etc.

The main problem is that in a turn the forces on the wing tend to make it bend upwards which increases the lift and drag and would increase the turn rate which rapidly turns a slow turn into a broken wing.

Modern laminates that are rigid in one direction and relatively flexible in the other promised a forward swept wing strong enough not to break in a turn but flexible enough to promise an active reshapable wing so you can have it flat and low drag for high speed flight and curved and high lift for takeoff and landing. A really active wing could mean no leading edge slats and flaps which would greatly reduce RCS as well.

Personally I would think if they can solve the problems of high speed a forward swept wing offers lower drag and higher lift.

a triangle like wing would help?

I believe it is better to make 2 vertical stabs and put it at the edge of the aircraft hull, similar to MiG-25/31 and F-15.

That means the vertical stabs won't be blocked by wing and hull at high AoA.

Russian aircraft corporation MiG working on outlook of new-generation interceptor — CEO

"After the work is over, we’ll consider the issue of concluding a contract [with the Defense Ministry of Russia] on its [long-range interceptor system] development," the MiG chief said

MOSCOW, August 21. /TASS/. The aircraft corporation MiG is working on the outlook of a new-generation interceptor for Russian aviation, MiG CEO Sergei Korotkov said on Friday.

"We’re conducting R&D, which helps determine the outlook of a long-range interceptor system. After the work is over, we’ll consider the issue of concluding a contract [with the Defense Ministry of Russia] on its development," the MiG chief said.

Meanwhile, Commander of the Russian Air and Space Defense Force Viktor Bondarev said the R&D work on creating a new interceptor to replace the Mikoyan MiG-31 (NATO reporting name: Foxhound) aircraft would begin no early than 2019.

That means the vertical stabs won't be blocked by wing and hull at high AoA.

Keep in mind this is an interceptor... so long range, high flight speed, ability to fly very high or very low if needed are all useful features along with very big radar/sensors, and significant payload of air to air weapons...

High manouver capability, along with stealth are secondary and would actually likely reduce performance in more important areas.

Twin fins is good for stability, but two fins is twice as heavy and increases drag compared to one.

On the other hand if you have two they don't generally need to be as big as they need to be when you only have one...

If the new aircraft has leading edge root extensions like the MiG-29/35 and Flankers then twin fins improve performance as they generally are in line with the energised vortexes generated by the LERXs, which improves control and stability...

PAK-DP will feature aerospace defense capability

Сегодня становится очевидным, что через какое-то время изменится характер угроз, исходящих от средств воздушного и воздушно-космического нападения. Произойдет их частичная интеграция, что потребует создания новых средств защиты. Руководство государства это понимает. Подтверждением служит создание нового вида Вооруженных сил - Воздушно-космических сил России

http://m.rg.ru/2015/08/23/mig.html

no here is what i mean to say
https://i.servimg.com/u/f18/19/23/23/63/wing13.jpg

jhelb wrote:PAK-DP will feature aerospace defense capability

Сегодня становится очевидным, что через какое-то время изменится характер угроз, исходящих от средств воздушного и воздушно-космического нападения. Произойдет их частичная интеграция, что потребует создания новых средств защиты. Руководство государства это понимает. Подтверждением служит создание нового вида Вооруженных сил - Воздушно-космических сил России

http://m.rg.ru/2015/08/23/mig.html

It was about time they start to think of that....