VVS Russian Air Force: News #1

GarryB wrote:Volume will reduce the cost but developing new models and sourcing western components not available in Russia will also drive up costs.

With a modern high tech production plant most of the costs are not labour costs so the low cost labour advantage Russia once had is now gone so prices are going to climb dramatically.

That is why I have been suggesting that alternative solutions to all brand new should be sought.

The plan of paying for 2,000 aircraft in the next ten years where 400 and something are upgrades is silly. A plan to make 1,200 all new aircraft, plus about 1,000 upgrades makes much more sense and would probably be much cheaper.

The problem is that the leadership have locked themselves into the delusion that only the latest and best will do.

The reality is that for the majority of its work the Air force doesn't need T-50s. For the majority of its work the Navy doesn't need carriers. It has been made known that for the majority of its work the Army doesn't need 22,000 tanks.

The point is that a country the size of Russia does need numbers in certain areas, and aircraft and ships are the two main ones.

The important thing is to have things in service and to give them regular and proper upgrades.

The changes made to the Army sound to a layman as drastic cuts, but they include the removal of lower readiness units and a slight increase in the highest readiness units so in practical terms instead of having about 1,800 odd tanks ready to roll they will actually have about 2,200. The enormous reduction in tanks sitting in storage should lead to those tanks getting regular upgrades etc so the Army will actually be a much leaner and meaner force with this reduction.

For the air force and the navy the situation is the opposite in that they do need numbers and it is often cheaper and easier to upgrade an existing aircraft or ship to an acceptable level than to make new ones from scratch.

With better command, control, communications, computers, Intel, and Recon the Army will find that it can move on the battlefield much more efficently and react to the enemy to maximise the damage they can deliver and the lease cost, with an improved air force hitting important enemy assets they can start planning for attacks like Desert Storm and the like.

In support of What Garry said:

What's next for the Russian Air Force?
RIA Novosti

22:56 03/12/2010 RIA military correspondent Ilya Kramnik - Deputy Commander of the Russian Air Force Igor Sadofiyev said on December 1 that in the next ten years, Russia will acquire more than 1,500 new aircraft and upgrade more than 400 others. The media has mentioned these figures more than once when quoting high-ranking military officers, but now the Air Force is ready to disclose the full range of its purchases.

Modernization

The modernization of obsolescent planes at a relatively modest cost makes it possible to sharply increase the combat potential of the previous generation of aircraft. Such improvements are common practice in many national militaries, and, for its part, Russia primarily plans to upgrade its long-range aviation and cargo fleet.

The Air Force will extend the service life of the Tu-160 (Blackjack) and Tu-95 (Backgin) strategic bombers and the Tu-22M3 long-range bombers and upgrade its IL-78 (Midas) refueling tankers. Additional improvements will be made to the A-50 "flying radar" and cargo aircraft, such as the An-124 Ruslan (Condor) and Il-76 (Candid) airlifters.

Front-line aviation will also undergo modernization, but the accent will be shifted. All things considered, the Air Force will likely discontinue the modernization of the Su-27 (Flanker) fighter into its SM version after it receives 12 new aircraft of this type in 2011. In addition, next year the Air Force will begin flying the Su-35S fighter - the latest derivative of the Su-27.

On the other hand, the Air Force plans to step up the modernization of the Su-25 (Frogfoot) assault plane, the Su-24 (Fencer) bomber, and the MIG-31 (Foxhound) interceptor. On par with transports and far-range bombers, they will form the backbone of Russia's upgraded air fleet.

What's new?

The planned purchase of 1,500 new aircraft and helicopters in the next ten years has sent some shockwaves, because in the past, annual purchases were limited to 30-40 aircraft in total. Many wonder if the plan is realistic.

Ruslav Pukhov, director of the Centre for Analysis of Strategies and Technology (CAST) and one of the leading domestic military experts, explains: "Most likely, this number - 1,500 aircraft - includes not only planes and helicopters, but also drones. Many countries count their aircraft in this way, for instance, when they present information to the UN Register of Conventional Arms.

In reality, the figure of "more than 1,500 aircraft" is most likely to include 350-400 new combat aircraft, about 100 military transports of different types, and 120-140 Yak-130 Mitten trainer aircraft. The remaining 800-900 aircraft will be helicopters and drones.

Some figures on particular types of aircraft have been specified. The Defense Ministry has already signed contracts for the purchase of 32 Su-34 (Fullback) front-line bombers through 2013, 48 Su-35 fighters through 2015, 12 Su-27 SM (Flanker) fighters through 2011, four Su-30M2 (Flanker C) aircraft through 2011, and 12 Su-25 UBM trainer aircraft.

This year the Defense Ministry plans to sign a contract for the delivery of 26 MIG-29K (Fulcrum) fighters by 2015. It is also expected to sign additional contracts for the purchase of at least 80 Su-34 (Fullback) fighter-bombers and 24-48 Su-35 (Flanker- E) fighters. All in all, these purchases will amount to about 240-260 aircraft.

Contracts for the purchase of another 100-110 aircraft are likely to be awarded to the Sukhoi design bureau for the T-50 fifth generation fighter and other Sukhoi aircraft.

The Defense Ministry also has plans to buy a long list of helicopters - primarily the Mi-28H (Havoc) and Ka-52 Hokum B attack choppers. By 2020, their numbers are likely to swell to 200-250 and 50-60, respectively, while different Mi-8 (Hip) versions will remain the backbone of the transport and combat fleet. Their serial production was launched in the 1960s and will continue for at least two more decades. The fleet of light helicopters previously represented by the Mi-2 (Hoplite) will be renovated - and the Mi-2 will be replaced with the light Ansat trainer and the multi-purpose Ka-60 Kasatka (Orca).

Unknown drones and the bottom line

The biggest enigma is the drones that the Air Force is planning to buy. In fact, today the military are expected to purchase drones that have not yet been developed or are, at most, in the last stage of design. It has been previously reported that the testing of domestic drones is scheduled to start in 2011. The new year will begin very soon, and hopefully we'll hear more about them in the next 12 months.

As to the Air Force's overall number of aircraft, I can only repeat the previous estimate given by RIA Novosti. But by 2020, Russia will have about 800 efficient combat aircraft and a total fleet numbering between 1,500 and 1,700 planes and helicopters. Including Navy aircraft, Russian military aviation will possess around 1,800-1,900 aircraft, not counting drones.

The views expressed in this article are the author's and may not necessarily represent those of RIA Novosti.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2010/russia-101203-rianovosti03.htm

Upgrades for the transports and bombers can keep them running for 50 years. Upgrading fighters makes it 35 years at best. We seen what happens doing that in India, bunch of flying coffins. The inventory of fighters is dated at 1987 on average. 23 years to date, 12 years left if refurbished. Su-27SM stopped, no MiG-29s upgraded, limited MiG-31 upgrades... we are losing over 1200 fighters not including Su-24. Include Su-34 we are still only getting 350 if all goes to plan... which it rarely does here. Lets list what we have today that can be considered modern fighters...

48 Su-27SM
34 MiG-29SMT
12 Su-30
16 Su-34
10 MiG-31BM

120 fighters considered modern?!?

VVS is supposed to compose 1500 fighters... we are screwed.

I agree, I think they have underestimated the value of upgraded fighters.

I think the Su-27SM upgrade should be continued and the Mig-29SMT upgrade applied too.

I don't think these upgrades should be at the cost of new aircraft, but as well as.

I think Russia really needs a cheap new -5th generation fighter that is smaller and cheaper than the T-50 that is stealthy but cheap to buy and operate. Something that can barely super cruise, but also can carry a large payload externally as a bomb truck when the enemies AD has been dealt with plus a fairly significant internal capacity for medium and short range weapons.

The focus is stealth so it is not at a disadvantage in combat, but also low cost to operate and buy so it can be bought in large numbers so that older aircraft can be retired.

I can understand upgrading the Mig-31 and the Su-25 because these aircraft are useful single role aircraft that are the best at what they do.
The Su-24 upgrade however is a puzzle in many ways. First it is a strike only aircraft which means if you have 200 of them you have 200 strike aircraft. If you instead spend the money to upgrade the Mig-29s to SMT standard and the Su-27s to SM standard you also have a short and medium range strike capability along with fairly solid air to air capabilities as well. I would think the Su-27SM would have performance similar to an Su-24 in the strike role using guided standoff weapons over similar ranges, whereas the Mig-29SMT would have similar performance over shorter ranges, but the Su-24 can't compete with either aircraft in the air to air stakes.
The final nail for the Fencer is that its replacement is in production. Perhaps when the Fullback (Su-34) is in service in sufficient numbers the plan might be to sell the upgraded Fencers to Algeria and Iran, but I think the air force should first of all clear the skies of enemy aircraft and go in and start taking apart the enemies air defence systems at the same time. The Su-34 should have air to air weapons that allow it to look after itself... it has R-77 and R-73 capability.
The Tu-22M3 is already getting an upgrade too so any really deep strike missions the Su-27SM can't handle could be performed by Tu-22M3s hopefully escorted by Su-35s or later T-50s. 24 tons of bombs with a 2,000km flight radius is rather impressive... I still think they should reinstall the inflight refuelling probes on those things because the 24 ton payload capability is achieved by offloading some fuel. By topping up just after take off you would greatly improve flight range performance.

Ok guys IDK how you would react to it but apparently RuAF is mustering a contract for 28 to 36(with option to even more) Su-30MKI or MKM (or equivalent modification) with PESA, Thrust vectoring, canards etc. Contract will be signed in nearest future. Wait for officious...

So what they want is something cheaper than the Su-35?

An Su-30MKI with Russian equipment replacing the Indian and foreign content would still be a step up from the Su-30MKK, but if that is the case why not just order new build Su-27SM?

And while they are at it why not just buy some Mig-29M2s?

Have they mentioned problems with the Su-35?

Maybe it has too many 5th gen bits that are not ready yet, or maybe they are getting a 4th gen fighter with a 5th gen price?

Andy_Wiz wrote:Ok guys IDK how you would react to it but apparently RuAF is mustering a contract for 28 to 36(with option to even more) Su-30MKI or MKM (or equivalent modification) with PESA, Thrust vectoring, canards etc. Contract will be signed in nearest future. Wait for officious...

Are your sure this has nothing to do with modernized Su-33 they are about to get?

I remember the last order they made there were about 6 Su-27SMs and 2 Su30M2s included.

The Russians have been using the Su-30M in a command type role using a larger radar that is on a lot to find targets and pass those targets on to other platforms so the other platforms can operate radar and radio silent much closer to the enemy.

Not so much in a Mini AWACS mode as is often described, but as a way for a flight of aircraft to operate near enemy lines in a radar silent mode but with full situation awareness because of data from the Su-30M.

I believe they even used a Su-30M to track the target during the famous test of the Mig-31M with its R-37 missiles. The particular model Mig-31M didn't have a new Zaslon-M radar so it needed an aircraft closer to the target to feed it the target information it needed to launch the missile and get it close enough for the missiles seeker to home in and kill the target.
The flight range of the missile was something like 300km.

GarryB:

Mig-29SM2 is now MiG-35 - the program is facing some serious drawbacks particularly with its radar & optronic sensor suite, the new engine RD-43 was cancelled etc.. Anyway no new information on MiG-35. (Although some RuAF officials mentioned plans on MiG-35 a while back)
Or you mean modernisation of existing fleet? I think there wont be any modernistation to Mig-29 and I agree fully with MoD on the issue the have max 10 years life in them - not worth it...

My version:
They get Su-30MKI'ski to complement and substitute sparkas(Su-27UB) as well as further expand multirole capability of the RuAF(the Multirole capacity is clear goal for all new airframes entering service)... There are less than 50 sparkas (Su-27UB) in flying conditions now.... Also this is a good sign, as maybe they may use them partly as trainers for Su-27SM3 - the 4++ gen Su-27 modernisation although it doesn't exist yet.(This means the Su-27's may not be retired as fast as Mig-29's)

To produce Su-27SM is an anachronism now, they want something like the mysterious Su-27SM3 although it is in very early RFP stage. (They only just recently tested an RVV-SD or R-77PD from Su-27SM with enhanced radar - read NIIP Tikhomirov CEO interview)
The Su-27 SM quantity will be 68-72 airrames total(They want to have three regiments, right now they got two - 2*24=48 + 4 in Lipetsk, 1-2 for testing...) - after that they'll move on to new types.

Although I'm beggining to think that Su-27SM3 may have become doomed now...

Aso a reason is that KnAAPO is overloaded with work on SSJ(the main factor),Su-35,PAKFA,Su-27SM,export Su-30's + maintenance and parts manufacturing for all the previously produced airframes(KnAAPO is now working as a repair site too) While Su-30MKI's are produced in Irkutsk..

What I think is that they are going to find aircraft cost is going to sky rocket and they are going to want a cheaper easy to produce smaller fighter that they can produce in large numbers that can do the job.

You don't need an F-22 to drop laser guided bombs on Chechen bases, and you don't need Su-35s to intercept civilian aircraft that have wandered off course into the wrong airspace.

Using an Su-35 as a mud mover and a fighter is stupid because of the cost of the Su-35.

What they need is a Mig-29SMT with modern weapons both air to air and air to ground.

One on one it might be at a disadvantage to a Typhoon or Rafale... but aircraft don't operate alone.

A flight of very high flying Mig-29SMTs carrying R-37s getting target data from A-100s (replacement for the A-50s) firing missiles at targets 400km away it really doesn't matter if your RCS 3, 2, or 1m square or if you can carry 5 tons or 7 tons of bombs.

If the in stock Mig-29s are not worth upgrading then make them new builds.

If the US can't afford more than 190 F-22s it makes even less sense for Russia to make more than that even if they are cheaper.

This means that 4+ generation aircraft like the Mig-35 and Su-35 will be the backbone of the Russian AF for some time to come so why not also have a numbers aircraft that is cheaper to buy and operate but has all the features of a modern fighter.

Quite frankly I don't think it is healthy to have one maker of fighter aircraft in Russia.

The problem with your thinking is that the Su-30MKI with all the Indian and foreign bits taken out and replaced makes it pretty much an Su-30MKK3 or perhaps 4.

As the new stuff gets more expensive they are going to need a cheaper option... and I can't see an Su-30MKK4 being all that much cheaper than an Su-35.

What they need is a smaller lighter cheaper fighter that they can new build that will offer good performance in air to air and air to ground but not appear too threatening to the west so its production in significant numbers is not worrysome.

I expect Russia stationing Mig-29SMTx near Finland would not have the same impact as them stationing T-50s or Su-35s, yet it can perform border patrol missions as well as any other aircraft.

Remember the Germans during WWII with their tank production?

The big heavy uber tanks look fascinating but when you only have 200 for protecting the territory of Russia you realise maybe you got caught up in what is the best in the world instead of what you need for the job.

It isn't enough to buy a few Su-35s and because they are multi role assume they can do the job of fighters and bombers.

When a multirole aircraft gets grounded or shot down it means you lost multiple capabilities.

Also it means you need to train your pilots for multiple mission types whereas in real combat you wont want Su-35s attacking ground targets... you will want them to primarily deal with enemy aerial threats... I really don't think the Army will understand that despite the fact that you have lots of multirole aircraft you can't spare any to actually fight the enemy ground forces because they are busy supporting SEAD missions or deep strike missions or simply trying to get air control... if you had larger numbers of smaller cheaper aircraft then it would be easier to train a larger portion for the swing role of tactical strike and air to air combat.

Regarding the Su-27SM3 any further developments in technology can be applied to in service aircraft as midlife upgrades... the main problem for the AF was the lack of money meant no upgrades and not enough maintainence. Money has to be spent on maintaining aircraft of large sums will be spent now on aircraft and will have to be spent again replace them every 10 years.

The thing is that each design bureau from the cold war period tended to have design bureaus it worked with, so we are not talking about the end of the Mig bureau alone, but also avionics and radar and engine makers too that are starved of cash and work when the Russian military neglects a product... and there is absolutely nothing wrong with the Mig-29.

Sorry folks busy with AeroIndia , hopefully I should get some good information.

But here is something to chew on from latest Air International , a new variant of Ka-31 for land reco and IL-112V will be funded.

http://www.4shared.com/document/P38pThg0/RussiaNews.html

my apologies on the b/w scan quality was in much hurry.

Thanks for that Austin... I wasn't even aware they were thinking of developing the Ka-31 into a land recon radar platform to support army operations. Interesting also that the platform is used to test that self defence system. I can imagine the final aircraft will certainly need it... even in a low tech fight.

Look forward to learning what you find out about at the show... a little bit jealous..

Don't forget to enjoy yourself. ...Expect a full detailed report including pictures.

Garry will try to do my best ,reached bangalore and fell ill the next day

I checked on the new missile they were suppose to display , there is no new missile but a sterlet launcher on a BTR like vehical with EO seeker.

Russia to buy 1,000 helicopters by 2020

RIA Novosti

13:22 24/02/2011

MOSCOW, February 24 (RIA Novosti) - Russia's Defense Ministry announced plans on Thursday to buy 100 ships, over 600 aircraft and 1,000 helicopters under a 2011-2020 arms procurement program.

Russia will buy 10 new generation S-500 air defense systems, which will replace the S-400 systems currently entering service with the Russian forces, said First Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin, who is in charge of arms procurement.

Russia plans to purchase more than 100 helicopters this year, including Mi-26 Halo heavy transport helicopters, Mi-28 Night Hunter and Ka-52 Alligator attack helicopters.

Russia's Defense Ministry submitted the 19 trillion ruble ($651 billion) arms procurement spending plan for 2011-2020 to the government in December. Some 80% of the funds will be spent on buying weapons and 10% will be spent on scientific research.

The official confirmed earlier reports that Russia will buy two Mistral assault ships from France, while two more of the ships will be built under license in Russia.

Russia is planning to build eight strategic nuclear submarines by 2020 and equip them with Bulava submarine-launched ballistic missiles, which are expected to be put into service this year.

Russia also plans to develop new heavy ballistic missiles to replace Soviet-era SS-18 Satan and SS-20 Saber ICBMs, Popovkin said.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/russia/2011/russia-110224-rianovosti01.htm

Russia will buy 10 new generation S-500 air defense systems, which will
replace the S-400 systems currently entering service with the Russian
forces, said First Deputy Defense Minister Vladimir Popovkin, who is in
charge of arms procurement.

WHAT?

They only have about 2 deployed batteries of the S-400 and they want to replace it with S-500?

Please tell me that is a translating error and he means the S-500 will replace the S-400 around Moscow and other places they have been intending to put ABM protection and that they will be produced together with S-500 as an ABM system and S-400 as a replacement for S-300 as a SAM and anti theatre ballistic missile system.

Russian Defense Ministry to buy transport aircraft An-140

Russian Defense Ministry has ordered seven light transport aircraft An-140. Told the head of the board of directors of OJSC "Motor Sich" Vyacheslav Boguslayev.

According to Interfax, Boguslayev said that the decision was made not to build a military transport version of the turboprop aircraft IL-112. Instead, the Russian Defense Ministry has made an order for seven aircraft An-140.

He also noted that plans to make cargo version of the An-140, designed to carry up to 6-7 tons of cargo. AN-140 - a joint product of Russia and Ukraine.

Previously reported that the Samara plant Aviakor signed a contract with the Ministry of Defense to build turboprop transport aircraft An-140-100. According to the press service of the enterprise, a regional 52-seater passenger jet AN-140-100 included in the list of defense contracts and will be used for special tasks military.

AN-140 was created to replace the outdated transport aircraft An-24 and AN-26, some of which are operated in the military.

It makes sense to use An-140-100 for Light Transport ,which is operational and available and has equal or better specs compared to IL-112V instead of reinventing the wheel and develop a new type.

This is a good decision.

So under the current reforms the Russian military has changed from 6 to 4 military districts and each district command structure has complete control of all forces within its area except for Airborne forces, Strategic Missile Forces, and Air and Space defence forces.

This means Army, Navy, and Airforce units are under one command in each district.

I think this will mean that the Airborne forces will need their own transport aircraft, fixed wing and helos if it is to be truely independent.

The Air and Space defence forces is relatively new and is basically the PVO plus all the over the horizon radars and space tracking bits of the Strategic Missile forces.

Their new role is to monitor the air and space above Russia to look for and deal with intruders.

The PVO had its own budget and its own custom designed equipment. A Flanker of the PVO forces had different radar frequencies and different missiles that were not compatible with Frontal Aviation Flankers for instance.
The PVO tended to use datalinks and had much tighter control of aircraft than Frontal Aviation did.
Aircraft unique to the PVO included the Tu-128 Fiddler which was a huge long range interceptor. Other aircraft used by the PVO included the Su-9, Su-11, and Su-15 series interceptors. The Su-9 and Su-11 looked like Mig-21s but were much larger and were pure interceptors. They also were the major user of the Mig-31 and Mig-25 in the interception role.

I therefore assume that the air and space defence branch of the military will get its own budget and will likely be looking for new designs to upgrade its existing equipment.
I look forward to see what they want to replace the Mig-31...
There is no huge hurry, but developments with the PAK DA might be relevant if it is a large supercruising long range aircraft with a large radar and a significant payload capacity.
Perhaps a non stealthy PAK DA scaled down a little with a reduced number of engines that can supercruise over strategic distances and with the extreme stealth features removed to reduce costs would be ideal. There is a whole range of new AAMs being developed for the PAK FA that can be launched from internal weapons bays, so these weapons could easily be compatible with a future interceptor variant of a PAK DA... and perhaps even by the PAK DA itself.

With longer wave radars mounted on wing leading edges of fighters... imagine the sort of arrays that could fit on a flying wing design... Quite useful for an interceptor.

Mig-31 will be replaced with some variant of PAK-FA and perhaps Mig-31 will be the last breed of dedicated interceptors

PAK FA would be a poor replacement for the Mig-31.

A replacement for the Mig-31 needs long range but also high speed... and not high dash speed, it needs to be able to fly around all the time at high speed.

It doesn't need stealth.

It needs the capacity to carry lots of heavy missiles and it needs a large powerful radar to find small elusive targets.

That doesn't say PAK FA to me.

Bigger aircraft are more expensive to operate, but long range and high speed are necessities.

To be honest probably the best two options right now to replace the Mig-31 would be a Mig-31 with new 5th gen 18 ton thrust engines, and a new large AESA radar.
The other option that I like too is put a new huge AESA in a Tu-22M3 with 6 long range two stage R-37M AAMs in the rotary launcher in its bomb bay.
Conformal missile positions covering the belly of the aircraft could also be used to carry 20-24 missiles meaning that a single Backfire could replace four Mig-31s.

Certainly they wont be funding a dedicated manned interceptor after Mig-31 so it could be PAK-FA derivative or some big UCAV.

Why wouldn't they fund a dedicated long range high speed interceptor?

They are funding a light 5th gen fighter.

Remember that it is not the Air Force that will be paying for it... now that the PVO is transferred to the Air and Space Defence structure that is not subordinate to the four military districts they will likely get money thrown at them.

The Mig-31 is very successful at what it does, there is no reason to suspect they will not replace it with a customised design.

The focus is not on stealth but long flight range at high average speed with the biggest and most powerful radar they can shoehorn into the nose of the aircraft.

To be brutally honest the Su-34 would be a better candidate than PAK FA.

Besides the PAK FA will not be very cheap anyway, and would be more use in places where dogfighting and manouver are important. Interceptors need long range radars and big missiles and to launch those missiles from high altitude and high speed to maximise the range of those missiles.

Should add that in addition to the reforms I mentioned above the Army Aviation has been moved to the Air Force and also the coastal fighter and anti ship/strike component of the Navy has also been transferred to the Air Force.

That is a whole lot more Tu-22M3 airframes for the Air Force, and Su-24s as well.

GarryB wrote:Why wouldn't they fund a dedicated long range high speed interceptor?

Probably because UCAV can do a better job or for manned fighter PAK-FA can do the same job , they can fit long range missile on external pylons of PAK-FA.

Mig-31 after modernisation will serve for another 15 year or atleast till 2025 , post that period it would be ucav

They are funding a light 5th gen fighter.

The recent news of light fighter based on ACM statement is just a myth , probably lost in translation and stuff like that.

I think the days of dedicate long range interceptors are gone , it would be big UCAV and Long Range SAM taking that role.

If UCAVs could perform the role then why bother developing the PAK FA... surely a UCAV can do that job too?

The truth is that hunting enemy cruise missiles and stealth bombers is easier with a huge radar on board and an IRST and real people and I doubt that will change in 15 years.

^^ because PAK-FA was designed 8-9 years back when there was no mature UAV technology forget about UCAV technology.

15 years from now they would have UCAV technology and netcentric capability to make it useful and viable to replace Mig-31 types if it gets decommisioned from RuAF , I personally think Mig-31 will stay till 2030 after refurbishment.

Till such time UCAV gets deployed in sufficient numbers they can always use derivative of PAK-FA in that role.

I disagree.

The Mig-31 can be upgraded with new 5th gen engines and new radar and 5th gen avionics which should make it cheaper to operate... the new engines should even allow super cruising potential if the new avionics reduce weight enough... and of course the new engines should be more fuel efficient as well.