F-22 vs. MiG-31BM
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
You are currently reading a thread in /k/ - Weapons
In terms of a reasonably likely scenario, say a group of Raptors flies into Russia.
>>30049826
>a group of Raptors flies into Russia
>implying
>Deadpool wins.
>>30049826
>A group of Raptors flies into Russia
>Implying this hasn't already happened
>>30049865
>implying it has
>>30049826
>F-22 vs. MiG-31BM
migs explode before they ever see the F22s
It really depends on the intentions of both parties involved. Both pretty effectively have the ability to avoid an engagement entirely if desired (albeit with radically different approaches). But if they DID both commit to going at one-another no-holds-barred, I think it's safe to say the Raptors would come away with more kills.
>Dat radar doe
What if they get the tech to put something on the nose of the Mig that can see stealth? The Mig has longer offensive range then.
>>30049929
>That can see stealth
>>30049898
>>Dat radar doe
Still inferior to the F-22's APG-77 though.
>>30049826
https://www.youtube. com/watch?v=EQ7MwfcjCa0
>>30049929
Firstly, the radar on the MiG-31BM is already pretty beastly. Secondly, all radars can "see stealth" if they're close enough; stealth isn't some binary invisibility switch. And thirdly, it's not enough just to have the launching aircraft be capable of detecting and tracking a target; those fuckhuge missiles need to be able to see the target to home in on it as well.
>>30049942
In some regards, yes. In others, no. The APG-77 isn't exactly built for brute-force range and power like the Zaslon is, but it's a much more sophisticated, multimode radar with LPIR capabilities.
MIGS catch on fire and explode attempting to intercept.
the end
>>30049958
the issue is the F22 and F35 can see you from like 800 miles away.
by the time the Mig's radar sees the f22, it's waayy 2 late.
>>30049826
Mig-31 can't get a radar lock and are blown apart by AMRAAMs.
In some mythical scenario where they entered a dogfight, the Migs would lose there too.
Who gives a fuck about radar when you're at Mach 3? Fucking amerilard tards
>>30049826
Difference in doctrine
If a group of Raptors flies into Russia then:
First it must have assurance that America can take a nuclear retaliation up its butt.
Second it's main enemy would be SAMs, if it has been detected then it is in the range of assault missiles such as BuK or Vityaz.
Third MiG31BM is an interceptor, normally used against bombers, not against air superiority trying to assert its domain.
>>30049886
Possibly on the tarmac, and the raptors may or may not exist.
>>30050056
>burn through all their fuel in 20 min
>have to land immediately and replace their engines
>gets destroyed on the ground
but hey, at least it didn't get shot down
>>30050064
>If a group of Raptors flies into Russia then:
They fly on to do whatever they came for then leave without being detected. The MiG's sit in hangers and slowly rust because there isn't enough rubles in the budget to pay for their flight time.
>>30050073
Lies, pure lies, propagated by the neoliberal 1%. Dont listen anon!
>>30050072
kek
Mig31 isn't even close to the same type of aircraft.
>>30050056
You know what is more impressive then mach 3?
Mach 1.8 without afterburners.
>>30049985
The APG-77 is the largest AESA ever put on a fighter; it has about 1950 T/R modules while (for example) CAPTOR-E only has about 1400 and the Rafale's AESA has about 1000.
Using public data about the MiG-31's Zaslon and the F-22's head-on RCS, the MiG-31 wouldn't detect the F-22 until it was 18.9km away (pretty much WVR).
>>30050150
Also, for anyone else that wants to do the calculation:
The Zaslon can detect a 20m^2 object at 400km, or a 5m^2 object at 282km (according to: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zaslon)
The F-22's RCS is supposedly 0.0001m^2 (a marble)
Known scenario = X, problem scenario = Y
Detection Range Y = Detection Range X / ((RCS X ^1/4) / (RCS Y ^1/4))
400 / ( 20^(1/4) / 0.0001^(1/4) ) = 18.915km
282 / ( 5^(1/4) / 0.0001^(1/4) ) = 18.858km
Average: ~18.9km.
The RCS of the F-22 is actually an order of magnitude larger (if it only had an RCS of 0.001m^2):
400 / ( 20^(1/4) / 0.001^(1/4) ) = 33.636km
So clearly the MiG-31 is screwed regardless.
>>30050150
How would the F-35 fare against the MiG-31?
>>30050181
Well inside the AIM-120 envelope. Mig-31 dead.
>>30050194
The F-35 supposedly has stealth similar or greater than the F-22 from front on; from the sides or rear it's almost certainly bigger though. There's no public data about the RCS of the jets from other angles though (whenever you hear a plane's RCS, it's just it's RCS from the front).
So in other words, it'd do almost as well, but it'd have the issue of not being able to launch AMRAAMs as far, meaning that it'd need to get closer to the MiG-31 (which could be an issue if the MiG is moving away from it).
>>30050181
Also, I made a typo; when I say:
>The RCS of the F-22 is actually an order of magnitude larger (if it only had an RCS of 0.001m^2):
I meant
>Even if the RCS of the F-22 is actually...
The most accurate figure I know is still the one with 4 zeros (0.0001m^2)
Burgers talking shit about again???
They cook up these burgers dumber every year, I swear.
![f-22-photo-2-of-4[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/jQZGHyk.jpg "f-22-photo-2-of-4[1].jpg")
![PoliteHonorableAmericansaddlebred[1].webm](https://i.imgur.com/lul82B1.jpg "PoliteHonorableAmericansaddlebred[1].webm")
>>30050357
neat
i just watched that video (assuming its from the same video) the other day and was thinking of making an webm
guess i'll just save yours instead
![FlamboyantVeneratedHorse[1].webm](https://i.imgur.com/5yJitzh.jpg "FlamboyantVeneratedHorse[1].webm")
HNNNNNNG
>>30050037
>the issue is the F22 and F35 can see you from like 800 miles away.
Not really. The F-22 MIGHT get an RWR reading that far if that massive Zaslon happens to illuminate it with the main beam, but that will only provide a partial picture of where the MiG actually is, as exact range information cannot be determined from this signal. Nevertheless, it's fairly safe to say the F-22 should be able to get a radar return on the MiG long before the MiG gets a return from the F-22, provided both jets are front-aspect to one another and buttoned up.
>by the time the Mig's radar sees the f22, it's waayy 2 late.
Perhaps, but not necessarily. The MiG-31BM's radar should be able to pick up an F-22 (doors closed) head-on from about 12 miles, an AMRAAM itself from about 50 miles, and an F-22 doors-open from likely more than that (if it's lucky enough to catch it, that is). And since the MiG-31 is one of the few fighters that actually carries enough fuel to spend prolonged periods of time at supersonic speed, it's credible that the MiG-31 could credibly escape an encounter with the F-22 by turning and fleeing. Combine that with numerical superiority, some VERY clever teamwork, and of course some luck, and MiG-31s might even be able to successfully harass intruding Raptors - drawing them away from their mission, depleting their fuel and missiles, and MAYBE even taking one or two out if they're extremely lucky. But any way you slice it, this is an extremely dangerous matchup for the MiGs and they're likely to suffer several times more losses than the Raptors do (if the Raptors lose any at all, that is).
>>30050102
I thought supercruise meant it can do mach 1 with no afterburner
Wtf
>>30050073
DELETE THIS
>>30049826
There is not a single scenario where mig comes out on top. Maybe if the plane carrying parts for f22 flies over russia
>>30050198
>Muh 100 mile AMRAAM
You realize the brochure range figures really mean jack-shit, right? They only correspond to a shot against a non-evading (usually head-on) target under ideal conditions at altitude.
>>30050150
>pretty much WVR
The whole "20 miles is visual range" thing is bullshit too. Contrails and lighting aside, it's hard to spot even an airliner-sized target at 5 miles. I think that metric's a relic from the Korean War era where hot-and-high was still the best way to evade air defenses and so relying on contrails for visual was a reasonable assumption.
>>30049826
Even modern F15's and rafaeles and such with better, more sophisticated radars have huge trouble getting a lock on the highly manouverable raptor.
Migs 31 is allready insanely unmanouverable since it sacrificed everything on top speed, in dogfight, the closest they come to victory is escape.
In BVR, raptors radar is more sophisticated and advanced instead of "big" so it will get detected far far before and again it's only option becomes escape.
You all think "ooh fast big russian plane with fast big russian radar" but you seem to forget that it's from another era where speed was thought to be the future. Russian avionics and radars don't come close to west, neither do the engines or any other technology. If MIG 31 or any other plane had a reasonable chance against a 5th gen, they wouldn't bother with pakfa at all.
Mig just gets fucked. Mig vs raptor is like trying to defend against an SAS squad with a watergun
>>30049826
>into Russia.
Ground radars. MiGs receive flight path and targeting from ground radars. They do that in automated mode since fucking 80th.
>>30050132
>The APG-77 is the largest AESA ever put on a fighter
Zaslon-M is bigger still, and since it's PESA fed by a primitive (yet efficient) central source without all the cooling issues associated with AESA, it has considerably more peak and average power.
>it has about 1950 T/R modules
Zaslon had 1700 emitters; Zaslon-M is 62% larger and so has about 2700.
The APG-77 is full ninja-mode, though. Zaslon can't hop frequencies or use multiple simultaneous beams or anything like that.
>>30050460
>Zaslon had 1700 emitters
And 120 km detection/90 km tracking range against 3 sq. m. RCS target. Conventional antenna AN/AWG-9 had better range.
>>30050460
PESAs still have the issue of being ~4-6x less sensitive than an equivalent AESA however.
