PAK DP prospective long-range interceptor

A rework of Mig-31 with modern materials, address some low hanging RCS fruit, modern electronics seems a reasonable, attainable goal.
Some new hyper-modern, LO, even faster thing seems hard to believe could be built in significant numbers.

hoom wrote:A rework of Mig-31 with modern materials, address some low hanging RCS fruit, modern electronics seems a reasonable, attainable goal.
Some new hyper-modern, LO, even faster thing seems hard to believe could be built in significant numbers.

Lets live to see. For new plane the advantage is new materials and also faster retreat after attack against fleet. Not to mention ASAT function (higher dynamic ceiling)

dino00 wrote:The fifth-generation MiG-41 fighter is being created in Russia - RAC "MiG"

"No, this is not a mythical project, a project for the MiG long-standing, now we are intensively conducting these works under the auspices of the UAC and will soon present them to the public," he said.

company's CEO Ilya Tarasenko

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201808171309-o5u6.htm

Nothing in the article talks about a modernization of the MiG-25/31.

Nothing in the article leads to think the MiG-41is a modernization of previous aircrafts.

In fact some explicit data excludes it. No-one modernization of the MiG-25/31 can reach the 5th generation.

eehnie wrote:

dino00 wrote:The fifth-generation MiG-41 fighter is being created in Russia - RAC "MiG"

"No, this is not a mythical project, a project for the MiG long-standing, now we are intensively conducting these works under the auspices of the UAC and will soon present them to the public," he said.

company's CEO Ilya Tarasenko

https://tvzvezda.ru/news/opk/content/201808171309-o5u6.htm

Nothing in the article leads to think the MiG-41is a modernization of previous aircrafts.

of course not, if it was a modernization of MiG-31 it would be referred as MiG-31M1/2 or sth like that

eehnie wrote:
In fact some explicit data excludes it. No-one modernization of the MiG-25/31 can reach the 5th generation.

So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

Lack of LO would be the only exception to standard definition of 5G, but this is highly dependent on role (for instance, no super-manoeuvrability or super cruise on F-35) For a Mach 3+ interceptor VLO is essentially irrelevant.

LMFS wrote:So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

because the exterior design can not be modified to fulfill the requirements of 5th gen (stealth). if you redesign the cell and flightmodel, you have a new airplane with new glider model.

Maybe its possible if you have wondertech like a startrek cloakdevice or magic paint (something better then current available RAM).

But what if "stealth" isn't necessary here? Let us not forget that stealth isn't really all that effective anymore with even newer radar systems. Make it more low observable with various ram coatings and paint application, mixed in with engine blockers and it would greatly reduce RCS.

If they go with shaping, it would be an expensive adventure.

miketheterrible wrote:But what if "stealth" isn't necessary here?  Let us not forget that stealth isn't really all that effective anymore with even newer radar systems.  Make it more low observable with various ram coatings and paint application, mixed in with engine blockers and it would greatly reduce RCS.

If they go with shaping, it would be an expensive adventure.

Mach 4 and RAM coating doesn't mix well. F-22 coating has already issues when it is exposed on the sun in a desert, let alone when flying a mach 4.

sda wrote:

LMFS wrote:So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

because the exterior design can not be modified to fulfill the requirements of 5th gen (stealth). if you redesign the cell and flightmodel, you have a new airplane with new glider model.

Maybe its possible if you have wondertech like a startrek cloakdevice or magic paint (something better then current available RAM).

Well, what is the sense of asking and leaving out of your post the part of mine were I was addressing exactly that question?

Survivability of such an aircraft is mainly due to speed, range and availability of long range AAM, plus use in the own air space or near it under the cover of AD and other supporting assets. I sincerely would like to know, how would USAF combat TODAY MiG-31 with the meagre Mach 4 MRAAM missile loads they carry in their 5G fighters. They simply have no way to control engagement IMHO.

Regarding coatings: maybe modern RAM and especially RAS are better than previous ones but requirements of flight above Mach 3 are very extreme. For instance, leading edges of stealth aircraft have, from what we know from open sources, a RAM finish with tapered dielectric constant to match impedance of air and reduce return. But at those speeds you are normally using very strong metals to withstand abrasion, so it is difficult to find some polymer that can substitute them and act as desired for RCS reduction.

Besides, Doppler return and IR signature of those planes when approaching at thigh speed are itself huge by definition. No point in trying very hard to hide them.

sda wrote:

LMFS wrote:So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

Lack of LO would be the only exception to standard definition of 5G, but this is highly dependent on role (for instance, no super-manoeuvrability or super cruise on F-35) For a Mach 3+ interceptor VLO is essentially irrelevant.

because the exterior design can not be modified to fulfill the requirements of 5th gen (stealth). if you redesign the cell and flightmodel, you have a new airplane with new glider model.

Maybe its possible if you have wondertech like a startrek cloakdevice or magic paint (something better then current available RAM).

This is exactly right. Only changing materials in the cover you are changing drastically the balance of weights in the aircraft, the requirements of the structure and all the dynamic behaviour.

In fact the features that define a new generation are features that can not be reached by aircrafts of previous generations. This is how a new generation of fighters is defined.

LMFS wrote:

eehnie wrote:
In fact some explicit data excludes it. No-one modernization of the MiG-25/31 can reach the 5th generation.

So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

Lack of LO would be the only exception to standard definition of 5G, but this is highly dependent on role (for instance, no super-manoeuvrability or super cruise on F-35) For a Mach 3+  interceptor VLO is essentially irrelevant.

First of all, we know not still the features that can define the 6th generation. It is too early for it. The research toward the 6th generation is not mature enough still. At the time the 6th Generation will be defined by features that can not be reached from aircrafts of the 5th Generation.

As consequence, no the 6th Generation will not be reached from the Su-57-PAK-FA.

The same from the 4th to the 5th. Neither from the basis of the Su-27, until the Su-35, and from the basis of the MiG-29, until the MiG-35, has been reached the 5th generation. Early research and development was started from both (MiG 1.44, Su-47,...) but all the projects were abandoned when the features of the 5th Generation were identified, because from the basis of the 4th Generation were not reachable.

And about the MiG-31, as much as I like the aircraft, I would say is a 3+ Generation. The maneuverability of the aircraft is not like the maneuverability of the Su-27 and the MiG-29. The MiG-31 moved toward more maneuverability from the MiG-25 but still i would not call it of the 4th Generation.

But at same time which is the meaning of this... Obviously the 3rd Generation is not dead. Remains modern today and very useful.

LMFS wrote:

sda wrote:

LMFS wrote:So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

because the exterior design can not be modified to fulfill the requirements of 5th gen (stealth). if you redesign the cell and flightmodel, you have a new airplane with new glider model.

Maybe its possible if you have wondertech like a startrek cloakdevice or magic paint (something better then current available RAM).

Well, what is the sense of asking and leaving out of your post the part of mine were I was addressing exactly that question?

Survivability of such an aircraft is mainly due to speed, range and availability of long range AAM, plus use in the own air space or near it under the cover of AD and other supporting assets. I sincerely would like to know, how would USAF combat TODAY MiG-31 with the meagre Mach 4 MRAAM missile loads they carry in their 5G fighters. They simply have no way to control engagement IMHO.

Regarding coatings: maybe modern RAM and especially RAS are better than previous ones but requirements of flight above Mach 3 are very extreme. For instance, leading edges of stealth aircraft have, from what we know from open sources, a RAM finish with tapered dielectric constant to match impedance of air and reduce return. But at those speeds you are normally using very strong metals to withstand abrasion, so it is difficult to find some polymer that can substitute them and act as desired for RCS reduction.

Besides, Doppler return and IR signature of those planes when approaching at thigh speed are itself huge by definition. No point in trying very hard to hide them.

Stealth technologies will lead to apply surface treatments (not only paint) that improve stealth features of many older designs, but as commented before, this will not make a design to jump to the 5th Generation, because all the specific gains by the desing can not be achieved. Otherwise we would end painting or applying other kind of surface treatment to units of MiG-21 to call them of 5th Generation.

Also some people is refering to the 6th Generation like the unmanned Generation. Wel this is not enough, and likely the final definition will not be based on that. Every aircraft can be made unmanned. If the definition is made as easy they will have to count the MiG-17, MiG-19 and MiG-21 made unmanned decades ago by the Soviet Union and China. It would be funny.

eehnie wrote:Also some people is refering to the 6th Generation like the unmanned Generation. Wel this is not enough, and likely the final definition will not be based on that. Every aircraft can be made unmanned ...

I would say, 6th gen is same as 5th, but unmanned.
Yes, every aircraft can be made unmanned. But there is more, it must be battle proof against ECM. As long as there is no 6th Gen fighter, 6th Gen is still undefined. Put a cryptoblockchainquantumprocessedbullshitAI in PAK-FA and you can call it first 6th Gen.

Maybe 6th Gen will be a carrier of small drones which will do the job. But thats blabla & OT.

@eehnie:

I don't care about aircraft generations. Performance is what matters. And MiG-31 remains ahead of the threats, at least as of now and with updated avionics / engines / weapons I guess it could do so for a couple decades at least.

You say at the same time 6G attributes are not know, but they cannot be met from 5G, interesting logic. 6G is already being defined, especially in US this is an active, ongoing work with significant resources. If they see their 5G falls short of addressing the threats (as I think it will happen), they will accelerate the "6G", whatever it is, even if there is no significant breakthrough to tell the two generations apart. This is i.e. what happens with Tempest, what is so 6G instead of 5G in that plane? I would say the logic behind 6G would be capacity to operate autonomously and hence we may not be talking about dramatic airframe changes anymore, who knows?

You say the MiG-31 is 3+G because it has no super-manoeuvrability, is that? That is not what an interceptor needs, and you can bet MiG-41 will also not be performing cobras at the airshows.

Signature management is today one step more of the combat aircraft design process and probably MiG-41 wont be an exception. But as you can imagine, a plane flying 4 M at high altitude has some other visibility concerns apart from being ultra-stealthy in the high frequency radar spectrum, and is difficult to target irrespective of its RCS.

LMFS wrote:

sda wrote:

LMFS wrote:So PAK-FA (5G) can be turned into 6G but MiG-31 (4G) cannot be turned 5G? Why not?

because the exterior design can not be modified to fulfill the requirements of 5th gen (stealth). if you redesign the cell and flightmodel, you have a new airplane with new glider model.

Maybe its possible if you have wondertech like a startrek cloakdevice or magic paint (something better then current available RAM).

Well, what is the sense of asking and leaving out of your post the part of mine were I was addressing exactly that question?

??????
Let me answer in different way:
It's impossible because the tech to transform Mig31 into 5th Gen in a cheap way doesn't exist. Its cheaper to design a new jet.
Electronic upgrades are not the problem.
Missing Stealth is one/the problem and there are 2 ways to make it stealth:
1. extorier change, reduce round surfaces and replace them with flat/angled surfaces. engine inlet ducts must be redesigned so avoid hitting radar the turbine. Wings & rudders must be redesigned for perfect radar reflexion. And it should keep flying fast. a complete change of the design is necessary.
2. paint it (and first stage of turbine) with a perfect working RAM that withstands Mach 3+

First method is insane costly and tricky. Its foredommed.
second: Theres not a dog's chance to get that in assumable time invented.


Sorry, I did not really understand your answer. From my side your answer seems a little bit featherbrained, I think we booth have a misunderstanding. If my answer above is again irrational, please clarify the problem. Currently it's sort of weird, lets try to cut the gordian knot.

Neither aircraft Generations is the most important for me. And as said before I consider the MiG-25/31, in their most modern variants a very modern and capable aircraft. But we must know that if a MiG-41 of 5th Generation has been announced, this is not a variant of the MiG-31.

About the development of the Generations, there are some facts:

- Every Generation has its own development, and the development of some Generations is simultaneous.
-- 3rd G: The development would be exhausted with the last modernizations of the MiG-31.
-- 4th G: The development of the Generation in mature, but not exhausted.
-- 5th G: The Generation has been defined with the first models but there is a strong development still in the form of variants and more models of more countries, to be done. 5th Generation + Unmaned would be for me still 5th Generation. Like 3rd Generation (MiG-21) + Unmanned is still 3rd Generation (Unmanned MiG-21).
-- 6th G: Still undefined, at least publicly. Basically nothing of what we read at this point makes think that features of interest that can not be reached from the basis of the 5th Generation have been identified.

- Every Generation has its origin in the development of the previous generation, but includes a different concept.
-- 5th G: As explained before, we know how advanced prototypes of the 4th Generation (Su-47, MiG-1.44) have been important in the definition of the 5th Generation. And when new features of interest not achievable from 4th Generation aircrafts were identified, a new project was started.
-- 6th G: By the same way, the 6th Generation will born when in the example of Russia, the development of new variants and prototypes of the Su-57 leads to discover features of interest, that are considered achievable but not from the basis of the Su-57. This will lead to the begin of the development of a new aircraft to achieve these features, that wil be an aircraft of the 6th Generation.

sda wrote: Put a cryptoblockchainquantumprocessedbullshitAI in PAK-FA and you can call it first 6th Gen.

Swarm intelligence is a very sophisticated tech but it seems to be a part of BS for you

sda wrote:
Sorry, I did not really understand your answer. From my side your answer seems a little bit featherbrained, I think we booth have a misunderstanding. If my answer above is again irrational, please clarify the problem. Currently it's sort of weird, lets try to cut the gordian knot.

I think it is a misunderstanding yes. I was arguing that not every 5G plane has all the 5G features - example being F-35 lacking supercruise and super-manoeuvrability. If stealth for you is mandatory to consider a plane 5G ok, be it. For me a 4 M interceptor has no use of it, irrespective of the generation, so I see no problem to call it 5G. But for what I am concerned, a re-engined, internally updated and newly armed MiG-31 could be called gen 4, 4.5 or 4.999+++, don't care. It would still wipe the floor with existing 5G threats and be modern in every practical sense.

LMFS wrote:

sda wrote:
Sorry, I did not really understand your answer. From my side your answer seems a little bit featherbrained, I think we booth have a misunderstanding. If my answer above is again irrational, please clarify the problem. Currently it's sort of weird, lets try to cut the gordian knot.

I think it is a misunderstanding yes. I was arguing that not every 5G plane has all the 5G features - example being F-35 lacking supercruise and super-manoeuvrability. If stealth for you is mandatory to consider a plane 5G ok, be it. For me a 4 M interceptor has no use of it, irrespective of the generation, so I see no problem to call it 5G. But for what I am concerned, a re-engined, internally updated and newly armed MiG-31 could be called gen 4, 4.5 or 4.999+++, don't care. It would still wipe the floor with existing 5G threats and be modern in every practical sense.

Mig-31 and mig-41 are interceptors which means they intercept at high speed the intrudors and shot missiles at it with no dogfight in mind at all. What they need is to be able to see stealth fighters. More money on radars, IRST and datalinks with ground airdefence is better for them than any stealth technology.

Isos wrote:

LMFS wrote:

sda wrote:
Sorry, I did not really understand your answer. From my side your answer seems a little bit featherbrained, I think we booth have a misunderstanding. If my answer above is again irrational, please clarify the problem. Currently it's sort of weird, lets try to cut the gordian knot.

I think it is a misunderstanding yes. I was arguing that not every 5G plane has all the 5G features - example being F-35 lacking supercruise and super-manoeuvrability. If stealth for you is mandatory to consider a plane 5G ok, be it. For me a 4 M interceptor has no use of it, irrespective of the generation, so I see no problem to call it 5G. But for what I am concerned, a re-engined, internally updated and newly armed MiG-31 could be called gen 4, 4.5 or 4.999+++, don't care. It would still wipe the floor with existing 5G threats and be modern in every practical sense.

Mig-31 and mig-41 are interceptors which means they intercept at high speed the intrudors and shot missiles at it with no dogfight in mind at all. What they need is to be able to see stealth fighters. More money on radars, IRST and datalinks with ground airdefence is better for them than any stealth technology.

They also need to fly very high very fast and carry precise long range weapons optimized for targeting other missiles as well.

GarryB wrote: Don't you love the irony... the F-35 probably will never super cruise, but will be classed as 5th gen (and probably isn't that stealthy anyway), but lack of stealth is an important so called feature of 5th gen aircraft.

ekhm F-35 and supermaneuverability? cough cough. But there is one feature of new generations its already have: price tag

It is an interceptor... manouver performance has zero value to such an aircraft, just as stealth means little for an aircraft with an enormous radar that will be continuously scanning for targets and threats.

and optics to see stealth or space threats hundreds of km away. My guess it is nt gonna be fighter. Interceptor for a range of threats. Space, air or ships / land (carrying hypersonic missiles) . Imagine it is coming in dash of 5000km/h around US bases (2000) and drops Kinzhal or so.

Which fighter or AA missile is going to get it? what will be envelope for missiles to catch such a plane?

GarryB wrote: Don't you love the irony... the F-35 probably will never super cruise, but will be classed as 5th gen (and probably isn't that stealthy anyway), but lack of stealth is an important so called feature of 5th gen aircraft.

They invented the slogan of 5G and they use it as they want, easy!

GunshipDemocracy wrote: Which fighter or AA missile is going to get it? what will be envelope for missiles to catch such a plane?

None, that is the funny part. You see it coming but can go nowhere and can do nothing. AMRAAM is 4 M only, so you need SAMs to get a chance... but not if the SAM sites or ships are blown up with a 10 M Kinzhal in advance. And besides, Russian LRAAM reach way faster and longer than US ones, at least that I know. That is why MiG-31 still is so powerful.

LMFS wrote:

GunshipDemocracy wrote: Which fighter or AA missile is going to get it? what will be envelope for missiles to catch such a plane?

None, that is the funny part. You see it coming but can go nowhere and can do nothing. AMRAAM is 4 M only, so you need SAMs to get a chance... but not if the SAM sites or ships are blown up with a 10 M Kinzhal in advance. And besides, Russian LRAAM reach way faster and longer than US ones, at least that I know. That is why MiG-31 still is so powerful.

and that's why MiG-41 will be a worthy successor - flying on dynamic ceiling like 40km enenlope fo ralmos all of AA missiles is close to 0 and range of Kinzhal can probably 1,5-2x longer.