What's the NATO equivalent to the Mig31, I read that it can reach Mach 2.83 and the comparable planes are Grumman F-14 Tomcat, McDonnell Douglas F-15 Eagle, F-111 Aardvark & Panavia Tornado ADV, but they are all a lot slower. The Tornado could reach Mach 2.2.
From Wikipedia:
>During the 2022 Russian invasion of Ukraine, MiG-31 aircraft have reportedly shot down several Ukrainian aircraft, mainly by utilising the long range R-37 air-to-air missile. By remaining at high speed and high altitude, MiG-31s have been able to operate virtually unopposed due to Ukraine's own fighters lacking range, speed, or altitude.[64][65]
What could the West send to Ukraine to counter the Mig31
f15s are purpose built to counter the mig25/mig31
rough past year, huh armatard?
What is Ukraine actually hoping to accomplish with these posts? Like are you guys going to fail your military objectives somehow if some dude posts a picture of a Mig-31 on PrepHole?
>armatard = Ukraine war
Leave war tourist
its not ukraine.
its american hyper partisan hyper nationalists.
they have a organized discord campaign to shit up any thread that criticizes american equipment.
you can literally post a thread about gear from 80 years ago, and these people will shit up the thread no matter how much evidence and argument you produce.
Their goal is not to argue in good faith, since they dont argue at all.
their goal is to just shit up the board to that point that discussion becomes impossible.
they have been doing this for years and the mods do nothing.
PrepHole generally just a shit site, youtube and twitter and reddit are unironically superior because those site automatically filter out autists.
Is not Typhoon literally built to counter this kind of threat and supersonic bombers?
>What could the West send to Ukraine to counter the Mig31
Basically everything including upgraded F-4s.
Like the Mig-25 the 31 is just a stupid dragster, only with more refined avionics.
Mach numbers mean shit if you cannot turn, are visible from hundreds of miles away but your sensors cannot pick up the enemy.
>Muh high speed close to Mach 3
Means the gas is empty after just a few minutes because the 31 needs its afterburners to reach that speed
>Still not enough to outrun AA missiles.
To be fair, the MIG-25 led a charmed life over Israel until the F-15 entered squadron service in the IAF service. The MIG-31 is in a similar position today in this war.
>Means the gas is empty after just a few minutes because the 31 needs its afterburners to reach that speed
The real limitation is heating of the front canopy, something only a few "modernized" MiG-31s have got fixed with modern materials.
its basically unbeatable by any non stealth aircraft from an airframe to airframe comparison. The missiles are not equal though
>Mach numbers mean shit if you cannot turn
this isn't 1940, more speed = more energy for your missile
>I read that it can reach Mach 2.83
KEK, no. Max speed is Mack 2.35. And most top speeds are bullshit anyway, with the plane only being able to reach such speeds at high altitude with a backwind and going slightly downward so that gravity is aiding. Top speed is nonsense with modern missiles. No plane is outrunning ATA or SAM, so anything over mach 1.5 is really unnecessary. All out speed is relic of the past that is obsolete now. A good thrust to weight ratio is more important, so in evasive or offensive maneuverers a plane doesn't bleed much energy.
>it’s a full half mach slower than everyone says it it because… umm it is okay?
>interceptors don’t benefit at all from speed btw
Holy coperald
Fuck you gay
Interceptors are retarded
iirc the mig 25 and 31 have an engine lifespan of 2 hours at maximum speed. going mach 2.x in one basically means it needs to be rebuilt when it lands.
>Max speed is Mack 2.35.
That's a mandated "training limit" and for when carrying external ordnance on the wing pylons, R-60 and R-73 pylons aren't built for it and the R-40s had vibration harmony issues, not sure about the R-77.
Carrying only on the fuselage stations they can go above that, but only for quick dashes, and since they practically never fly that configuration it's neither here or there in terms of operational capability.
Armatard/newfag thread. Abandon.
(Armata)rd
Arma(tard)
(Arma(ta)rd)
~~*A(rm(a)t)a(r)d*~~
~~*Armatard*~~
Why is it so boxy, is it like the Volvo of airplanes.
The intakes? IIRC it's an airflow volume and stability thing. The F-15 has similar ones.
It's a flying brick of a plane so the designers naturally had to make it look like one.
the west has absolutely NOTHING to counter this, and MIG-31 flying at top speed launch their missiles to "SPEED RAMP" them, causing them to go hyper-sonic making them inescapable and undefeatable
MIG-31 closed ukrop hohol gay skies and sent dozens of their pilots 200
>the west has absolutely NOTHING to counter this
bro please.
Any plane with an AMRAAM can counter the Mig 31.
The only thing a very high top speed is good for is running away from someone. Wich I guess fits Russian doctrine perfectly.
Ever wonder why they won't invade Alaska.
MiG25/31 speeds are bullshit like everything Russia claims
Typical jet engines are limited to about 2.5 because of compressor surge
You need bypass engines to go above 2.5 like in the SR71
The Russians claim they got a MiG31 up to 128,000 ft
The US claims their streak eagle, a plane with FAR better thrust to weight and outright weight and aero topped out at 103k
Russians lie about everything.
iirc they didn't reach it by flying at that height, but it essentially being the highest point of a parabel flight
but yeah, there is always some fuckery involved
>it can reach Mach 2.83
Impressive, very nice... Lets see its average cruise speed...
nothing, the West is of powerless we must respect the rusian bear
The F-106 was the last purpose built interceptor fielded by the US armed forces. Other jets have filled the roles.
I really do not think NATO has a thought controlled aircraft that can land on frozen lakes.