MiG-31BM/Κ Interceptor/Attack aircraft: News

owais.usmani wrote:So is R-37 not compatible with Mig-31BM upgraded model?

It is and they are using them but they still have a big stock of r-33.

Nice photos.... the blue 29 is a VMF aircraft as shown by the markings on the tail.

So is R-37 not compatible with Mig-31BM upgraded model?

The MiG-31BM can use either, though unlike the MiG-31M, it only carried four of either weapon in the belly position.

The MiG-31M had a revised belly to allow two rows of three R-37M missiles allowing 6 to be carried instead of four (two rows of two).

This being a Navy aircraft might be using up the older missiles in training and practise.

It is definitely a BM model as it has four wing pylons while the older MiG-31B only had two wing pylons.

The MiG-31M removed the gun, which is visible in this photo.

Incredible images. When they are fresh from restoration they look incredible. Particularly the canopy, radome and the general finish. Mig 31 was always superior interceptor even to the f-14 back in the day.

Mig 31 is an interceptor. F-14 interceptor/fighter/bomber that is in the class of su-27. Not the same type of aircraft.

The F-14 is no better a bomber than the MiG-31BM... it can carry four 1.5 ton FAB-1500 under its wings and two more under its belly and perform high altitude bombing strikes... it evolved from the MiG-25RB blind high altitude bombing aircraft.

9 tons of bombs (6 x 1.5) is not a minor payload...

The F-14A was not really a good dogfighter and had engine issues.

As an interceptor its radar was excellent for the time but also very limited.

Being mechanically scanned it could lock and shoot down 6 targets at one time which it did on one occasion during a test, with targets at different horizontal angles and distances, but the vertical separation of the targets was less than 1,000m because of the mechanical scanning of the radar.

In comparison the PESA radar on the MiG-31 is much better and can scan an enormous volume of air space in comparison.

The Tomcat can also operate from an aircraft carrier too.

The MiG-31 is the worlds best interceptor.

was going to reply but Garry you already said it. mig31 is tops. superior interceptor. still love tomcat.

TMA1 wrote:was going to reply but Garry you already said it. mig31 is tops. superior interceptor. still love tomcat.

They are two completely different things, I don't even know why are they being compared

And F-14 it the most beautiful airplane that ever flew, USA lost a lot of cool points when they retired it

GarryB wrote:The F-14 is no better a bomber than the MiG-31BM... it can carry four 1.5 ton FAB-1500 under its wings and two more under its belly and perform high altitude bombing strikes... it evolved from the MiG-25RB blind high altitude bombing aircraft.

9 tons of bombs (6 x 1.5) is not a minor payload...

The F-14A was not really a good dogfighter and had engine issues.

As an interceptor its radar was excellent for the time but also very limited.

Being mechanically scanned it could lock and shoot down 6 targets at one time which it did on one occasion during a test, with targets at different horizontal angles and distances, but the vertical separation of the targets was less than 1,000m because of the mechanical scanning of the radar.

In comparison the PESA radar on the MiG-31 is much better and can scan an enormous volume of air space in comparison.

The Tomcat can also operate from an aircraft carrier too.

The MiG-31 is the worlds best interceptor.

Iranian have sent an f-14 against an f-15 in the air to fight and see which one is better. They choosed the f-14 at the end. It tells you a lot about its fighter capabilities.

US used it with guided bombs.

And its radar was fine to hunt soviet bombers or fighters. Phoenix was a hell of missile with long range.

Mig-31 untill recently was just an interceptor with r-33 (120km) missiles.

If they did upgrade the f-14 it would have been better than all of the f-16 and f-15 or f-18.

PapaDragon wrote:

TMA1 wrote:was going to reply but Garry you already said it. mig31 is tops. superior interceptor. still love tomcat.

They are two completely different things, I don't even know why are they being compared

And F-14 it the most beautiful airplane that ever flew, USA lost a lot of cool points when they retired it

no, no they are not completely different.

"I dont even know how they could be compared."

hyperbole. you seem to fall into that a lot. look at their weapons systems. look at their original primary roles. and of course everyone likes the tomcat.

Isos wrote:

GarryB wrote:The F-14 is no better a bomber than the MiG-31BM... it can carry four 1.5 ton FAB-1500 under its wings and two more under its belly and perform high altitude bombing strikes... it evolved from the MiG-25RB blind high altitude bombing aircraft.

9 tons of bombs (6 x 1.5) is not a minor payload...

The F-14A was not really a good dogfighter and had engine issues.

As an interceptor its radar was excellent for the time but also very limited.

Being mechanically scanned it could lock and shoot down 6 targets at one time which it did on one occasion during a test, with targets at different horizontal angles and distances, but the vertical separation of the targets was less than 1,000m because of the mechanical scanning of the radar.

In comparison the PESA radar on the MiG-31 is much better and can scan an enormous volume of air space in comparison.

The Tomcat can also operate from an aircraft carrier too.

The MiG-31 is the worlds best interceptor.

Iranian have sent an f-14 against an f-15 in the air to fight and see which one is better. They choosed the f-14 at the end. It tells you a lot about its fighter capabilities.

US used it with guided bombs.

And its radar was fine to hunt soviet bombers or fighters. Phoenix was a hell of missile with long range.

Mig-31 untill recently was just an interceptor with r-33 (120km) missiles.

If they did upgrade the f-14 it would have been better than all of the f-16 and f-15 or f-18.

I could stick a targeting pod on a mig-31 too.

their primary roles are very similar. their radars were built around similar tasks. same with the missiles. id say the mig-31 started with superior radar but inferior missiles (which were upgraded later to have similar guidance and range abilities to aim-54). are you guys just splitting hairs and arguing for sport? dont get it.

I could stick a targeting pod on a mig-31 too.

their primary roles are very similar. their radars were built around similar tasks. same with the missiles. id say the mig-31 started with superior radar but inferior missiles (which were upgraded later to have similar guidance and range abilities to aim-54). are you guys just splitting hairs and arguing for sport? dont get it.

No you can't just stick a pod. You need a full upgrade.

Mig-31 was build with r-33 in mind to patrol the north where they couldn't have enough AD systems and from where bombers with cruise missiles would come.

F-14 is a carrier based aircraft that can be used as a fighter and an interceptor.

Mig-31 in dogfight has no chance and it never had r-27/77 missiles to face fighters until the modernizarion to BM standard.

I stand by what I said.

was going to reply but Garry you already said it. mig31 is tops. superior interceptor. still love tomcat.

The Tomcat didn't get interesting till the F-14D model with decent engines. Before that it was a bit sketchy in turning and burning.

Iranian have sent an f-14 against an f-15 in the air to fight and see which one is better. They choosed the f-14 at the end. It tells you a lot about its fighter capabilities.

Tells you that Sparrow missiles sucked, but from very long range Phoenix missiles had some potential.

US used it with guided bombs.

Actually they relegated it to fighter only because they wanted to get rid of it.

They used it in Afghanistan because their bomber of choice.... the Hornet... didn't have the legs to get to Afghanistan and perform a mission and head back to carrier.

And its radar was fine to hunt soviet bombers or fighters. Phoenix was a hell of missile with long range.

Its performance in tests was interesting, its combat record not that impressive.

Mig-31 untill recently was just an interceptor with r-33 (120km) missiles.

Has the F-14 ever killed anything at greater ranges than that?

The MiG holds the world record for a 300km missile flight distance to kill a target.

If they did upgrade the f-14 it would have been better than all of the f-16 and f-15 or f-18.

Of course they could but that would kill off the Hornet programme and then the Super Hornet programme and then the F-35C programme.... and they have made trillions off those three programmes alone... way more than they could think of making with a Super Tomcat or Tomcat 2000.

I could stick a targeting pod on a mig-31 too.

Don't need to... it already has ground mapping radar and IRST system built in.

You need a full upgrade.

The BM upgrade has already been applied.

Mig-31 in dogfight has no chance and it never had r-27/77 missiles to face fighters until the modernizarion to BM standard.

F-14 wouldn't last long in a dogfight either, the speed and missile range of the MiG-31 means it can turn around and nothing can catch it.

But that is easier for the Foxhound because the F-16 and F-18 are slower than their bigger counterparts mach 2 and 1.8 respectively, while the MiG-29 and Su-27 family are mach 2.4 fighters... with high off boresight R-73 missiles...

GarryB wrote:

was going to reply but Garry you already said it. mig31 is tops. superior interceptor. still love tomcat.

The Tomcat didn't get interesting till the F-14D model with decent engines. Before that it was a bit sketchy in turning and burning.

Iranian have sent an f-14 against an f-15 in the air to fight and see which one is better. They choosed the f-14 at the end. It tells you a lot about its fighter capabilities.

Tells you that Sparrow missiles sucked, but from very long range Phoenix missiles had some potential.

US used it with guided bombs.

Actually they relegated it to fighter only because they wanted to get rid of it.

They used it in Afghanistan because their bomber of choice.... the Hornet... didn't have the legs to get to Afghanistan and perform a mission and head back to carrier.

And its radar was fine to hunt soviet bombers or fighters. Phoenix was a hell of missile with long range.

Its performance in tests was interesting, its combat record not that impressive.

Mig-31 untill recently was just an interceptor with r-33 (120km) missiles.

Has the F-14 ever killed anything at greater ranges than that?

The MiG holds the world record for a 300km missile flight distance to kill a target.

If they did upgrade the f-14 it would have been better than all of the f-16 and f-15 or f-18.

Of course they could but that would kill off the Hornet programme and then the Super Hornet programme and then the F-35C programme.... and they have made trillions off those three programmes alone... way more than they could think of making with a Super Tomcat or Tomcat 2000.

I could stick a targeting pod on a mig-31 too.

Don't need to... it already has ground mapping radar and IRST system built in.

You need a full upgrade.

The BM upgrade has already been applied.

Mig-31 in dogfight has no chance and it never had r-27/77 missiles to face fighters until the modernizarion to BM standard.

F-14 wouldn't last long in a dogfight either, the speed and missile range of the MiG-31 means it can turn around and nothing can catch it.

But that is easier for the Foxhound because the F-16 and F-18 are slower than their bigger counterparts mach 2 and 1.8 respectively, while the MiG-29 and Su-27 family are mach 2.4 fighters... with high off boresight R-73 missiles...

Give the Syrians 8 Mig-31BM and Israel would fly head and neck attacks until they are destroyed. Give them Su-35 to the Syrians and nothing would happen. That is the difference.

Similar to PanzirM to TorM. Give the Syers 12 TorM2KM and Israel would do anything to destroy them immediately. No matter what it costs.

There is a reason why the Mig-31 has never been exported. The General Staff doesn't like that at all.

Syria had mig-25 in quite good number. They could have upgraded them with mig-31 avionics/radars/missiles pretty easily.

Libya and Algeria too.

It's a must to have such plane in your air force. 100 of them with 1000 r-37M with 200 mig-29M/su-30.

India should also look for it. They would be in better position with 50 mig-31 and a couple hundreds of r-37M.

Isos wrote:Syria had mig-25 in quite good number. They could have upgraded them with mig-31 avionics/radars/missiles pretty easily.

Libya and Algeria too.

It's a must to have such plane in your air force. 100 of them with 1000 r-37M with 200 mig-29M/su-30.

India should also look for it. They would be in better position with 50 mig-31 and a couple hundreds of r-37M.

First those corrupt, thick skull ed Hindus need to create a descent IADS. Then they can contemplate buying new fighters.

More importantly, they don't have the eco system for the Mig-31. Creating that would cost them billions. Unlike Russia, US, China they don't have that kind of budget. So they should continue to purchase more Mig 29s and Su 30MKIs. R-37M can be integrated with both these two fighters.

Better clients for the Mig 31 are Saudi Arabia as well as Qatar and UAE. Unlike India they have deep pockets and the Mig 31 will augment their current capabilities.

First those corrupt, thick skull ed Hindus need to create a descent IADS. Then they can contemplate buying new fighters.

Minus the ethnic insults, you are right... your command and control system is much more important than the individual components.

In fact often having a variety of tools is better than having the most used ones... in a good management system it means you can be more flexible and effective.

More importantly, they don't have the eco system for the Mig-31. Creating that would cost them billions. Unlike Russia, US, China they don't have that kind of budget. So they should continue to purchase more Mig 29s and Su 30MKIs. R-37M can be integrated with both these two fighters.

There is no solid strategic cruise missile and bomber threat, so MiG-35s and Su-35 level upgraded Su-30MKIs make sense along with S-400 and other air defence missiles.

I would say S-350 would be sensible and easier to make in large numbers and deploy widely...

Better clients for the Mig 31 are Saudi Arabia as well as Qatar and UAE. Unlike India they have deep pockets and the Mig 31 will augment their current capabilities.

They would hand them over to the US in a heartbeat and would have no serious use for them either... you can bet they wont be compatible with US AWACS aircraft... and besides, the MiG-31 is not in production so they would come out of stocks and I would say a better use for those planes would be MiG-31K anti carrier aircraft, and MiG-31D anti satellite launcher and MiG-31BM2 with new AESA radar and new upgraded engines for more power take off... perhaps test models for the MiG-41 programme.

..a better use for those planes would be MiG-31K anti carrier aircraft,..

at 41 tons MTOW & huge size? there's no CVN that has room & CATOBAR capability for it.

at 41 tons MTOW & huge size? there's no CVN that has room & CATOBAR capability for it.

I was replying to someone who was suggesting selling MiG-31s to countries like Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and UAE for use in their original role of heavy high speed long range interceptor...

My response was that the MiG-31 is no longer in production, though the engines have been put back into production, which means any sales to foreign countries would deplete Russian stocks of the aircraft, though as I said the engines are in production so that is not a problem in that regard.

These airframes would be more valuable to Russia  as I said as land based interceptors (BM), anti carrier use (K) and anti satellite use (D).

Further, that improved engines and radars and systems intended for its replacement MiG-31 could be fitted to in service aircraft for testing and eventual operational use to get lots of testing done and also to improve the performance of existing aircraft as part of development funding for the new aircraft.

At no point did I suggest any MIG-31s or for that matter MiG-41s could be used on an aircraft carrier.... even a 150K ton carrier with fully operational EMAL cats... you simply would not be able to land them even if you could get them in the air.

The aircraft that the US developed into the F-111 was supposed to be a carrier based aircraft but it proved to be too heavy too.... it was modified and made lighter and became the F-14A, which is why the F-111 and F-14A had the same engines...

Fine, I missed that "anti-" part. How about making STOL MiG-31s with J-39 or Su-33-like canards?
The Yak-41 was lighter but had similar dimensions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31#Specifications_(MiG-31)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-141#Specifications_(Yak-41)

A trimaran CVN/TAKRN could handle them, leaving F-18E/Fs & F-15EXs in the dust.

..the F-111 ..proved to be too heavy too.... it was modified and made lighter and became the F-14A,..

That's an interesting detail: General Dynamics F-111 after modifications became Grumman F-14A Tomcat- I didn't know that competing aerospace companies would share their secrets & know- how! Perhaps the USN pressured them to do so, didn't it?

Mig-41 is in development. They won't start a new program for a naval mig-31.

Mig-41 however is possible to come in naval vatiants.

Tsavo Lion wrote:Fine, I missed that "anti-" part. How about making STOL MiG-31s with J-39 or Su-33-like canards?
The Yak-41 was lighter but had similar dimensions:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mikoyan_MiG-31#Specifications_(MiG-31)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yakovlev_Yak-141#Specifications_(Yak-41)

A trimaran CVN/TAKRN could handle them, leaving F-18E/Fs & F-15EXs in the dust.

..the F-111 ..proved to be too heavy too.... it was modified and made lighter and became the F-14A,..

That's an interesting detail: General Dynamics F-111 after modifications became Grumman F-14A Tomcat- I didn't know that competing aerospace companies would share their secrets & know- how! Perhaps the USN pressured them to do so, didn't it?

Because MiG-31 wing are small and extremely thin, canard but also TVC wouldn't help.
Sturdier wing= bye bye 2.8 mach.

Rob Lee
@RALee85
·
5h
Izvestia reports that the Russian MoD is forming a new coastal defense division in Chukotka as part of its emphasis on the Arctic and the Northern Sea Route that will cover as far as Wrangel Island. Its first regiment was stood up at the end of 2020.

Izvestia also notes that some MiG-31BM interceptors from the 317th Composite Aviation Regiment have now been permanently based in Anadyr's Ugolny Airport after reconstruction. Orlan-10 UAVs are also based there.



Copied to Arctic thread