posted on Jan, 5 2008 @ 12:51 AM
just as teh mig cannot link with other aircraft - amoungst themselves with same equipment its fine - but with other aircraft with older gear
it cant - the mig31 cannot link to a mig29 - so would give a voice talk through.
I actually have the pdf – “Page .82 from a pdf. "MiG-25 Foxbat, MiG-31 Foxhound, Russia's Defensive front line" published in 1997 by Midland
Publishing limited and Stephen Thompson Associates.”
Have you read it?
How do you figure voice talk through”? Just something from the top of tyour head?
Instead of wasting my time I’ll just repost what other informed people have already posted.
Thw MiG-31's datalink (APD-518 Intra-flight Datalink) was very very well in service when the aircraft entered servie in early 80s. Indeed,
Su-27S/P (only VVS/V-PVO nomenclature have nothing to do with special setups) had also a very very similar IFDL to that of the MiG-31 since the IOC in
1985, the TKS-2-27/K-DlA, that allows up to 16 aircraft to share information (radar contacts, targetting priorities, aircrafat position, etc) over a
10sec refresh date (6.5sec for 4 group a/c, 2 sec for 2 group a/c). The datalink simbology is pretty similar in both aircfat and I would made an
educated guess that both datalink are compatible.
What made the MiG-31's IFDL different from that of the Su-27S/P is that it allows full a/c control over the "slaves", this means, that the
commander of the group could make control directives (just like the Vozdukh-1/Lurch series of C2BM sets) and direct their aircraft towards targets and
so. This is not allowable in the TKS-2-27.
Bot aircraft had Lazur type datalinks too (running in 300-400MHz frequency with from 30 to 300bits/s of speed), while the TKS-2-27 at least could run
in IFDL modes at up to 4.6kb/s of speed. I don't know if TKS-2-27 allows one Flanker to share fire control of an R-27R/ER from another Flanker, but
I'm pretty sure this is a possible cpability for the APD-518 (and maybe the little improved set installed in Su-27PU specialized Long-Range Air
Superiority/Air Defense Fighter for V-PVO).
Both sets could receive intercept directives AND target info from Rubezh/Senez/Lurch/Vozdukh-1 sets and from A-50 SDRLO.
The MiG-31B uses a little improved version of the APD-518 (don't know designation sorry) that allows not only to receive or interchange contacts
between the group BUT also to send information/contacts to command posts (to Rubezh C2BM per example) so they can send the info through the chain to
other Air Defense assets (like the Polyana-4DM or Baikal sets for control of Air Defense Brigades and Regiments), forming a better SA for all around.
Also the range of comms was 4 times longer (make sense) and more jam-proof.
I don't know exactly how did the Tu-128-M4 (or wathever is called I'm not that good with those pocket-interceptors) works, but could guarante you,
isn't the same thing as APD-518/TKS-2-27. From operation frequency, to bandwith to just interface...don't see it
TKS-2-27 by the way does allow tracking hand off thus enabling them to run chain saws.
Did you catch the part lead where MiG-31 can actually take FULL control of other birds in the group and guide them remotely to the target?
and FredT is making an opinion that the serbs are `nazi` like not the russians - and its his opinion.
Harlequin, labeling Russians and Serbs as Nazis is not an “OPPINION”, its hate speech, and it’s appalling that such behavior is coming from a
I’ll wait a little longer, but I’m simply shocked to see ATS forum moderator openly spreading hate speech all while forum members call it
Hate speech = Hate crime!
When a skin head razes his hand and screams “sieg heil!” he’s not expressing his “opinion”, he displays his intent.
I’d like to know what other ATS mods think about this, because if this is what ATS has turned into, it’s a damn shame.
[edit on 5-1-2008 by iskander]