Russia working on MiG-31 replacement

At the same press conference announcing the PAK-DA, Russian General Viktor Bondarev also announced that Russia had begun work on a new fighter interceptor to replace the MiG-31 Foxhound.

The MiG-31 entered service in 1983, and was designed as a pure interceptor against low level bomber incursions (B-1s). It has a Mach 2.83 top speed, and a range of 900 miles. It was equipped with an outstanding "look down-shoot down" radar system (especially for the times).

In the 1980s, the Soviet Union was working on a program known as the Multifunctional Distant Interceptor, or Project 7.01, which was eventually abandoned.

During Lt. Gen. Viktor Bondarev’s conference, during which information on PAK-DA bomber was relased to the public, the Air Force Commander also mentioned that Russia has started working on MiG-31 replacement.

It is an interesting phenomenon that the Russians still aim at single-purposed specialized designs, whereas the US designs are predominantely multi-role.

Bondarev said that the Russian Federation would need a fighter interceptor for defense forces that would be compliant with the requirements of the modern battlefield. Taking into account the fact, that the territory of Russia is extremely vast, it is crucial to have efficient plane which could be able to operate effectively in the huge airspace.

The Soviet designers were working on a Multifunctional Distant Interceptor concept named Product 7.01 in the ’80s, but ultimately the project was abandoned.

theaviationist.com...

reply to post by Zaphod58


I wonder why they are going to the expense of developing a replacement for the Foxhound when they have already developed the astonishing SU-47 Firkin,(and the Mig 144),i'm sure that either of these magnificent aircraft could readily be configured as interceptors.

reply to post by nake13


The Su-47 was nothing but a technology demonstrator. They tried to sell it to multiple customers, including the Russian Air Force, but no one wanted it.

The MiG 1.44 hasn't flown since 27 April 2000 when it flew a 22 minute flight (only the second flight), and hasn't been seen since. It's presumed cancelled.

Well, Putin's a 'happenin' dude! We see him skin diving, boating, hunting, finding treasure purely by luck (ha ha ha) and just about everything a manly man is supposed to be doing. That's one guy who knows his P.R.!

Now how is it going to look to show Russia's face at the Paris Air Show in future years with antiques as American Aircraft are getting the whole crowd to oooo and ahhhhh? He had to fix that little imbalance, right? Looks like he's hard at work.

reply to post by Wrabbit2000


Exactly. The Russian military has been in worse shape than the US military for years (and that's saying a lot considering the shape of our military). They found a bunch of money in the form of huge resource fields in Siberia, and now they're on a massive modernization kick.

The problem is that their industry is the same as it was in Soviet times. The Su-34 is a great example of that. You can pull the same board out of two different planes, and they're built completely differently. Parts in the wrong place (sometimes on the wrong side of the board), soldering that is something a first year electronics person might do, etc. Every single Su-34 in their inventory has some kind of problem, from navigation, to fire control, to everything in between. Sukhoi blames the air force maintenance, who blames Sukhoi.

The Russians always think bigger and faster is better when it comes to most of their military hardware, Especially their aircraft. Case in point the Mig-25 and 31. They were fast but they would have to burn their engines out to reach those speeds. Many learned that hard lesson trying to run down or then trap the SR-71.

They cant build a lot of them good so they want a few that can scream to the target then probably wont be able to do anything when it gets there because they would have burned all their fuel

When are they ever gonna get it? Fix the ones you have Vlad and then you might have a good air force instead of the laughable display your boys put on trying to hit stationary targets in Georgia. What was it, three days to hit one oil pipeline?

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
They were fast but they would have to burn their engines out to reach those speeds. Many learned that hard lesson trying to run down or then trap the SR-71.

Soviet and later Russian engine development has always lagged behind the West. At times they made horrifying engines. They have lately bought engines from GE and Pratt & Whitney, which even though they are turbofans for large aircraft, will go a long way towards helping develop a fighter type turbofan and improving their engines greatly.

reply to post by Zaphod58


The fit and finish of the Russian aircraft, even the ones in their museums, have never been something pleasing to most western eyes.

Funny though even the Spitfire of WWll and all it's lines of beauty when inspected closely had a few rough places too...Hand drilling and riveting kinda depends on how much the worker had to drink the night before I suppose?

Originally posted by Zaphod58

The MiG 1.44 hasn't flown since 27 April 2000 when it flew a 22 minute flight (only the second flight), and hasn't been seen since. It's presumed cancelled.

They rolled it out at MAKS a couple of years ago. It's been sitting exposed in the boneyard at Zhukovsky field. And the Su-47 is hiding out there too.

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
They were fast but they would have to burn their engines out to reach those speeds. Many learned that hard lesson trying to run down or then trap the SR-71.

Soviet and later Russian engine development has always lagged behind the West. At times they made horrifying engines.

Why are their jet engines so poor, when they have excellent rocket engines? Of course they are not the same thing but some of the underlying technology and knowledge base must carrier over---turbomachinery and extreme conditions for liquid-fueled rockets present similar problems as high performance jet engines.

reply to post by mbkennel


Rocket engines don't have the moving parts that a turbofan does. A rocket has to burn hot and fast, but not for long, where a turbofan can be subjected to temperatures near, or over 2000 degrees for several hours at a time.

What's unusual is that the Soviets were actually ahead of the West in titanium production and manufacturing (titanium is used in several engine parts), but the West was years ahead of them in engine production.

Originally posted by mbkennel

Originally posted by Zaphod58

Originally posted by Patriotsrevenge
They were fast but they would have to burn their engines out to reach those speeds. Many learned that hard lesson trying to run down or then trap the SR-71.

Soviet and later Russian engine development has always lagged behind the West. At times they made horrifying engines.

Why are their jet engines so poor, when they have excellent rocket engines? Of course they are not the same thing but some of the underlying technology and knowledge base must carrier over---turbomachinery and extreme conditions for liquid-fueled rockets present similar problems as high performance jet engines.

On the contrary,Russian/soviet aero engines are up there with the best,for example the Kuznetsov NK- 32 turbofan which is fitted to the supersonic tu-160 Blackjack bomber, rated at 55,000lbf with full afterburner,it is the most powerful purely military turbofan engine ever produced(civil airliners use engines rated higher),and has proven to be very reliable.
Incidentally,the Mig 25 Foxbat would not only be capable of catching the SR-71,it could have both outrun and flown higher than it(the Foxbat still holds the absolute altitude record for a military aircraft with air breathing engines) .

reply to post by nake13


Tell that to the Russian pilots I met. According to them, when they fly (especially the Condor), they sit on the runway for two minutes, brakes locked, at full power. If during that two minute time frame they don't lose an engine, they release the brakes, and take off.

The problem with Russians is lack of skilled workers. They can design anything they want and well as they want but, when the USSR collapsed along with defense industry all those skilled workers either went away or retired with no new generation to replace them. Now they are starting from scratch in many ways.

reply to post by MrSpad


Exactly. That's exactly what they said with the Su-34. All the skilled labor from before has left the country for the most part, and the ones that didn't are all older, so it's harder for them to work like before. The younger ones just don't have the skills that the workers had before.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by nake13

 

Tell that to the Russian pilots I met. According to them, when they fly (especially the Condor), they sit on the runway for two minutes, brakes locked, at full power. If during that two minute time frame they don't lose an engine, they release the brakes, and take off.

I agree that some of the earlier engines produced by Isotov and Soloviev were somewhat hit or miss,but the current engines are certainly on a par with those produced by GE,P&W etc.Incidentally,it wasn't just the Mig 25 pilots who had to run their engines for a period of time prior to take off,early versions of the English Electric Lightning with Sapphire engines were also run on the brakes for up to 3 minutes in case of engine failure.
Both the Foxbat and Lightning were cutting edge designs,being the fastest aircraft in their respective air force's inventory so "incidents" would have been expected.

Incidentally,I had the privelege of meeting and talking to Blackjack and Backfire crews,who had nothing praise for their respective mounts,a "white swan" at take off is a magnificent sight.

reply to post by nake13


It wasn't just the MiG-25 though, he said it was just about everything.

One of the reasons that their new engines are on par with P&W and GE is because in the early 90s or so, they bought a bunch of engines from P&W (even signed an exclusivity contract with them being the only western engine seller) for their transports. Once they had them, it was a simple matter of learning from them, and improving their existing, and new engines.

reply to post by Zaphod58

If you go back even further, to the Mig 15,it was the gift of the Rolls Royce Nene engine by the UK government that allowed the mig 15 to fly,of course this engine was then back engineered by the soviets giving them quite a lift with their jet engine programme.

reply to post by nake13


That story is always fun to hear.

That one, and the time that Rolls Royce gave Soviet engineers a tour, and they all wore soft soled leather shoes to pick up any metal shavings from the floor, took their shoes off, and had them analyzed.

Originally posted by Zaphod58
reply to post by nake13

 

That story is always fun to hear.

That one, and the time that Rolls Royce gave Soviet engineers a tour, and they all wore soft soled leather shoes to pick up any metal shavings from the floor, took their shoes off, and had them analyzed.

Almost as bad as the Soviets denying all knowledge of the concord blueprints being used to construct the TU-144,even though BAC deliberately included the canards in a set, when they were suspicious that design secrets were being passed to the soviets.