Mig-31 as the ultimate fighter ?

Read the forum code of contact

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

Debatable, because aerodynamic FAB-500-62s are much smaller than R-33 or R-40 missiles. Also with turbofans instead of turbojets, MiG-31 may even have inferior performance to MiG-25, its impossible to know without solid numbers, which I dont have. R-37 is not yet in service, and it may never enter at all. Current aramament of MiG-31 is R-33S, and i believe it will be until someone decides to upgrade it with RVV-BDs. I believe R-37 upgrade -even if possible- at this stage is not logical. Because in current state MiG-31 already has a clear edge (in terms of attack range) over all legacy fighters. With the development of LO, VLO targets, russians need to upgrade its sensors, not missiles.

the R-37M ALREADY IN PRODUCTION http://en.ria.ru/russia/20120124/170929008.html just the same as Meteor or Aim-120D
and then there is Mig-31BM which alot more agile than normal mig-31 with the LERXs and wingtip endplate fin also it can carry 6 R-37M in the belly and have stronger radar
http://airbase.ru/sb/russia/mikoyan/mig/31/m/img/mig31m4.jpg
http://airbase.ru/sb/russia/mikoyan/mig/31/m/img/mig31m37.jpg

Member for

11 years 10 months

Posts: 980

That model of MiG-31 was a one-off prototype and not put into production. Comparison made in this thread have been against aircraft that are in actual production and squadron service. We could always bring out the F-22A vs. the upgraded MiG-31BM and I still say the fight is over before the MiG-31 knew what hit it.

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

That model of MiG-31 was a one-off prototype and not put into production. Comparison made in this thread have been against aircraft that are in actual production and squadron service. We could always bring out the F-22A vs. the upgraded MiG-31BM and I still say the fight is over before the MiG-31 knew what hit it.

how the f-22 can shot down the mig-31 if it's missiles can't even turn at the altitude where mig-31 is flying ? , and mig-31 have L-band radar + IRST so stealth will not be a problem , not to mention the higher altitude help it see the target where their RCS is biggest

Member for

11 years 10 months

Posts: 980

how the f-22 can shot down the mig-31 if it's missiles can't even turn at the altitude where mig-31 is flying ? , and mig-31 have L-band radar + IRST so stealth will not be a problem , not to mention the higher altitude help it see the target where their RCS is biggest

Like I stated before, the MiG-31 is not going to fly and fight at 95,000'. Anyone who believes that the MiG could even hide at that altitude is dreaming. Back in reality, the MiG-31 and the F-22 would find themselves at comparable altitudes. The F-22 would cruise in at supersonic speed and hit the MiG before the pilots even knew what happened. The MiG-31 cannot super cruise and does not possess anti-radar capability like the F-22. It is tough to hit something you can't see coming...

Member for

18 years 9 months

Posts: 13,432

How far can each fly supersonic? How important is the ability to do it without afterburner? How far could SR-71 fly supersonic, & did it 'supercruise' in modern terms?

Perhaps what matters most isn't whether afterburners are being used, but how far, how fast.

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

Like I stated before, the MiG-31 is not going to fly and fight at 95,000'. Anyone who believes that the MiG could even hide at that altitude is dreaming. Back in reality, the MiG-31 and the F-22 would find themselves at comparable altitudes. The F-22 would cruise in at supersonic speed and hit the MiG before the pilots even knew what happened. The MiG-31 cannot super cruise and does not possess anti-radar capability like the F-22. It is tough to hit something you can't see coming...

read post #22 USAF have observed Foxhounds fly at mach 2.6 ( which is even faster than the top speed of F-22 )for 650 miles ,while the F-22 can only do 100 nm of supercruise at mach 1.7 that show you how inferior the F-22 is ( PAK-FA isnot much different and F-35 is even worst )
yeah F-22 is stealth while mig-31 isnot however mig-31 have L-band radar + IRST so stealth will not be a problem , not to mention the higher altitude help it see the target where their RCS is biggest so i impossible for F-22 to sneak in invisible
how could the F-22 kill the target if it's missiles can't even turn at that altitude , ok let assume that mig-31 can only cruise at 70-80K feet rather than 125K feet it still doesn't matter aim-120 with very small fin will not be able to turn at all at that altitude ( remember that most aircraft can't fly at that altitude and they obviously have bigger wing to body ratio than a missiles how do you expected missiles with tiny wing to turn ? ) and what if mig-31 do a zoom climb when the missiles is coming ?

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

How far can each fly supersonic? How important is the ability to do it without afterburner? How far could SR-71 fly supersonic, & did it 'supercruise' in modern terms?

Perhaps what matters most isn't whether afterburners are being used, but how far, how fast.

dont know about SR-71 but mig-31 can cruise 650 miles at mach 2.6 , F-22 can cruise 100 nm at mach 1.7 , F-35 can cruise at mach 1.2 for 150 miles

Member for

11 years 10 months

Posts: 980

read post #22 USAF have observed Foxhounds fly at mach 2.6 ( which is even faster than the top speed of F-22 )for 650 miles ,while the F-22 can only do 100 nm of supercruise at mach 1.7 that show you how inferior the F-22 is ( PAK-FA isnot much different and F-35 is even worst )
yeah F-22 is stealth while mig-31 isnot however mig-31 have L-band radar + IRST so stealth will not be a problem , not to mention the higher altitude help it see the target where their RCS is biggest so i impossible for F-22 to sneak in invisible
how could the F-22 kill the target if it's missiles can't even turn at that altitude , ok let assume that mig-31 can only cruise at 70-80K feet rather than 125K feet it still doesn't matter aim-120 with very small fin will not be able to turn at all at that altitude ( remember that most aircraft can't fly at that altitude and they obviously have bigger wing to body ratio than a missiles how do you expected missiles with tiny wing to turn ? ) and what if mig-31 do a zoom climb when the missiles is coming ?

I suppose you are going to tell me the MiG-31 can do a zoom climb from 125,000' to the reaches of space. LOL. The SR-71 didn't even operate at 125,000' on a routine basis.

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

I suppose you are going to tell me the MiG-31 can do a zoom climb from 125,000' to the reaches of space. LOL. The SR-71 didn't even operate at 125,000' on a routine basis.

no but it possible from 80K feets to 100 or 125K feets , the highest flying aircraft is mig-25 not SR-71

Member for

11 years 7 months

Posts: 3,156

no but it possible from 80K feets to 100 or 125K feets , the highest flying aircraft is mig-25 not SR-71

Ok, so this thread is pretty obviously a waste of time at this point so I am done.

I will leave by saying that while the Mig-31 is most certainly a superior aircraft to a Mig-25 they are very comparable aircraft in terms of their speed and altitude performance and operational concept. If 1970s era F-14s with AIM-54 and AIM-7 and 1991 era F-15Cs with AIM-7 were able to bring down Mig-25s then I think an F-22 armed with AIM-120C7s or AIM-120Ds would feel pretty good about its odds.

Member for

11 years 10 months

Posts: 980

no but it possible from 80K feets to 100 or 125K feets , the highest flying aircraft is mig-25 not SR-71

The highest air-breathing jet record is held by the Ye-266, a MiG-25 prototype. The production foxbat did not have that performance, besides the blackbird was faster.

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

Ok, so this thread is pretty obviously a waste of time at this point so I am done.

I will leave by saying that while the Mig-31 is most certainly a superior aircraft to a Mig-25 they are very comparable aircraft in terms of their speed and altitude performance and operational concept. If 1970s era F-14s with AIM-54 and AIM-7 and 1991 era F-15Cs with AIM-7 were able to bring down Mig-25s then I think an F-22 armed with AIM-120C7s or AIM-120Ds would feel pretty good about its odds.


i have explained so many times why the old F-15 was able to shot down mig-25 , it have nothing to to with technical aspect of each aircraft but factor like support , pilot
also like explained before missiles with big wing like Aim-54 , Aim-7 actually turn alot better than aim-120 at high altitude
the only reason why you leave is because you can't make any logical argument why iam wrong

Member for

10 years 5 months

Posts: 2,014

The highest air-breathing jet record is held by the Ye-266, a MiG-25 prototype. The production foxbat did not have that performance, besides the blackbird was faster.

fine let assume mig-31 in production dont have performance of the prototype , it can still fly at 80-90K feet where missile like R-77 , Aim-120 and meteor simply can't turn

Member for

14 years 1 month

Posts: 8,850

Ok, so this thread is pretty obviously a waste of time at this point so I am done.

I will leave by saying that while the Mig-31 is most certainly a superior aircraft to a Mig-25 they are very comparable aircraft in terms of their speed and altitude performance and operational concept. If 1970s era F-14s with AIM-54 and AIM-7 and 1991 era F-15Cs with AIM-7 were able to bring down Mig-25s then I think an F-22 armed with AIM-120C7s or AIM-120Ds would feel pretty good about its odds.

You need to see these kills from a perspective similar to P-51D vs Me262. Quite a few Schwalbes got shot down by piston fighters due to various circumstances (prior to landing, right after take-off, lucky shot, rookie pilot), and while I am pretty sure the Mustang would even have a positive record vs the Messerschmitt, it does not change the fact that Me262 was visibly superior to P-51D in most parameters.

Member for

11 years 7 months

Posts: 3,156

You need to see these kills from a perspective similar to P-51D vs Me262. Quite a few Schwalbes got shot down by piston fighters due to various circumstances (prior to landing, right after take-off, lucky shot, rookie pilot), and while I am pretty sure the Mustang would even have a positive record vs the Messerschmitt, it does not change the fact that Me262 was visibly superior to P-51D in most parameters.

:rolleyes:

This is hardly a case of P-51s orbiting a German airfield late in the war...

Most of the Mig-25s shot down in combat were by the Iranians. Even if we ignore those kills and focus on the US kills the Mig-25 was on the offensive in each case. They entered each engagement at a time and place of their choosing and simply weren't that effective.

What this is is yet another case of internet enthusiasts having trouble putting spec sheet numbers into context. A higher top speed and altitude simply don't convey the advantage that people around here would like to believe.

Member for

13 years 5 months

Posts: 3,381

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/6263/yviv.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img593/3315/iay0.jpg

http://imageshack.us/a/img826/2860/nhi2.jpg

I don't know about 'the ultimate fighter', but she ain't lookin' too bad that's for sure! :eagerness:

Member for

15 years 5 months

Posts: 6,983

"A time will come where technology will come to a level thath missiles will really do what they are supposed to do and maneuverability will become obsolete."
Yes, that time may come with a new propulsion some day, but by then top of the line a/c will be equipped with DEW at least for missile defense,
if not outright fight other a/c, and that is when agility become obsolete.

Member for

24 years 2 months

Posts: 7,989

Great photos! Good looking bird!

Member for

11 years 6 months

Posts: 932

Honestly, the threat was essentially gone. If the US needed to sink such ships they would rely on air launched Harpoons which were seen as more than sufficient given the inability of those ships to protect themselves adequately against air strikes. Now that China is rolling out credible fleet air defense in the form of its new DDGs and carrier the US is once again developing a proper long-range ASCM.

Funny, considering a kirov or a slava along with their task forces pack 500++ air defense missiles; layered in long, medium short and point defense ranges. Slava alone can direct 8 missiles at their targets at once, not to mention sovremennys (2 at once) udaloys (4 at once) and other escorting ships. How many hornets can a CVBG deploy? 24? 36? No, the threat is pretty valid, its just the US Navy choses to ignore it. Thats a rather long and irrelevant debate in this topic.

Sorry, but this is not how the US thinks/plans/operates. Back when the AMRAAM was being designed the good old USSR was absolutely the threat and the Mig-25/31 was a big part of the air to air threat. There is zero chance the US would have developed and fielded a missile that they did not believe was capable of bringing down a Mig-25. Even after the Cold War Mig-25s remained in the holdings of multiple potentially hostile states, including Syria, Libya, and Iraq.

Finally, it isn't like it is a mystery how the Mig-25 would perform in combat. Iraq used them extensively in the Iran/Iraq war and to fairly good effect, though not without losses. By the time the Iraqis flew against the coalition in 1991 and later over the no-fly zones the Iraqis had plenty enough experience with the Mig-25 to know how to employ it in combat.

Over the course of their operational use Mig-25s have been brought down by AIM-7s, AIM-54s, and an AIM-120. Now here we are on the internet learning that they are invulnerable to all Western weapons... :rolleyes:

Zero chance? AIM-120 is also a product of compromises, you cant build a missile that would both work at high and low altitudes very well, and stay lightweight. Its an improvement to AIM-7 and thats it. Its not an I win button.

Like you said it isn't mystery. In overal course of the arab israeli clashes and gulf war, out of 50+ AIM-7/120 missiles fired, only 4 hit their targets (<8% success rate). Another two downed after the war ended, which I dont count for air-air victory. And these are actually aircraft managed to fire their missiles. In how many intercept attempts they couldn't even fire at MiG-25, I leave this to your imagination. Records speaks for itself; Does this confirm your point, or mine?

I never said invulnerable. I am saying it is nearly invulnerable in set of given conditions. When conditions change, so does the end results.

Member for

11 years 6 months

Posts: 932

I will leave by saying that while the Mig-31 is most certainly a superior aircraft to a Mig-25 they are very comparable aircraft in terms of their speed and altitude performance and operational concept. If 1970s era F-14s with AIM-54 and AIM-7 and 1991 era F-15Cs with AIM-7 were able to bring down Mig-25s then I think an F-22 armed with AIM-120C7s or AIM-120Ds would feel pretty good about its odds.

Real question is out of how many attempts. 20 MiG-23s hunting lone F-22s repeatedly over a 20 year period will eventually down some. That won't make anyone say "F-22 is vulnerable to MiG-23" or "MiG-23 can succesfully shot down an F-22". However same logic fails when we are talking about MiG-25.