Russian MiG-31 Fighter Jet (Infographics)

Donate

The Russian-made MiG-31 fighter jet is able to maintain combat effectiveness despite the potential use of active and passive radar jammers and thermal decoys by adversaries. If four MiG-31 jets are united in a group, they are able to control an area of air space across a total length of 800–900 km. According to the Russian Defense Ministry, it’s epxected that the MiG-31 will remain in service till 2030.

Russian MiG-31 Fighter Jet (Infographics)

Click to see the full-size map

The MiGs Return:

It is easy to forget, given that the Russian airgroup at Hmeimim was wholly composed of Sukhoi aircraft, including the Su-24, -25, -27, -30, -34, and -35, that the word MiG has been synonymous with “fighter” for most of the post-World War 2, era. MiG Design Bureau’s dominance started with the famous MiG-15 fighter of the Korean War fame, through MiG-17, -19, and -21 of the Vietnam War, Arab-Israeli Wars, and the India-Pakistan conflicts and ending with the MiG-23 that was the frontline Soviet fighter for most of the 1970s and 1980s and the MiG-25 strategic interceptor. The dominance of the MiG family was eclipsed and ultimately ended by the sudden emergence of the Sukhoi Design Bureau which spent decades building attack, bomber, and strategic interceptor aircraft such as the Su-15 and whose introduction of the record-breaking Su-27 meant the MiG suddenly became the “junior partner” in the Su-27–MiG-29 combination of fourth generation fighters which entered service in the 1980s…

Loading the player...

Donate

SouthFront

Do you like this content? Consider helping us!

  • Tom Johnson

    “A match for ‘MOST’ of the F-16 variants” but not a match for Block 50 and above F-16’s. It’s your propaganda I’m just quoting…lol As for the F-35 you need to talk to some F16 and F18 pilots.

    • Brad Isherwood

      MIG 31 is a capable area denial and Hunter platform.
      An Agressor has to evade upon detection or after attack…which is higher %
      standoff. … vs US deep penetrator boasting.
      COPE Indian showed that lesser calibre aircraft could kill F 15C inside the box.

      Russia being the home team and defender will have ground launch and Naval
      Launch to assist……before the agressor…escape the box.

      The performance stats for Russian missiles is approx in the arena of public debate.
      If they perform on par or better than the new Kalibre class missiles…
      US/Nato and Israhell…..in for rude awakening when facing off against Russia A Team.

      • Tom Johnson

        Russian air defences are as capable as a T72 in a Tank fight-they are over hyped, slow and defeatable. You are drinking too much “flavor-aid”.

        • Monte George Jr

          You totally miss the point of WWIII. Neither USA or Russia has the means to defend against the strategic nuclear forces of the other. Russia will not waste time “shooting at ghosts”; they will immediately cut the head off of the snake. America will cease to exist, regardless of what damage Russia sustains.

          • Robert Ferrin

            Ah one who gets it sure is refreshing from all these armchair generals that have read one to many comic books.!!!

          • Jesus

            What narratives do you listen to? Political generals are useless. How many wars has US won since the WW2? Russia is twice as large as US and can absorb a nuclear strike much better than US.

          • Robert Ferrin

            Ah my friend I think you mis-understood for I was agreeing with his assestment cut off the head and the rest won’t rattle long.@!!!

          • Tom Johnson

            You’re a bigger idiot that the two prior idiots. Russia has 320 cities of 50,000 the US has 2x that and has almowt 3x the total population and more distribution of essential infrastructure.

          • Jesus

            By large I meant the land mass, it might help you to study some geography, if east and west coast are attacked, along with some inland targets, US is pretty much done. And God forbid if the survivors do not have their I phones operational, they would be almost useless. The baby boomers, the x and y generations have lived easy lives making them inept in face of some serious adversity. The Russians are hardier and have a much higher pain thresh hold. Yes, the Russians would do better after a nuclear exchange

          • Tom Johnson

            You’re also an idiot.

          • Robert Ferrin

            You my friend are one of those that if you can’t dazzle them with brilliance than baffle them with bullshit as most trolls do.!!!

          • Sinbad2

            The Americans don’t think so, they think that they can arrange for Europe to attack Russia, and the US will make a lot of money arming the Europeans, like it did in WWI and WWII. Just like in the other world wars, the US will only intervene to protect its investment in Europe, and enter at the last minute, and claim victory just like they did in WWI and WWII.

            They think that Russia would not dare to strike the USA, their arrogance, overpowers any commonsense they might have once had.

            PS Russia does have the means to defend against US nuclear forces.
            They have spent the last 70 years preparing to defend against a US attack.
            Their radar can see stealthy aircraft, and their missiles can shoot down American missiles planes and bombs.

            Sure, some American nukes would get through, but all Russian nukes would hit the USA.

            If you look at how the Russian military is arranged, it’s all defense, fortress Russia.
            The US doesn’t do defense, all American weapons are offensive in nature. The US doesn’t believe that any nation would dare to attack the USA.

          • Tom Johnson

            You’re an idiot.

        • Sinbad2

          Face reality, if Russian defenses were as bad as you believe, the US would have invaded decades ago. The US never passes up an opportunity to attack and pillage.

          • Tom Johnson

            You win the title of the “I’m the village idiot”.

        • Jesus

          Where would the 100 F22 be based? The Russians claim they can see stealth, Americans do not believe it, as far as the drones and ” top secret toys” keep working at it, the Russians are markedly ahead in EW/ECM technology.

          • Tom Johnson

            S-band under 2mhz can percieve stealth not track it. The smaller the target the easier, ghe larger the target the more difficult. The B2 is still stealth, and now you know thw “why” to the LRSB. The Russians cannot buy computer processors because of sanctions and you are stupid enough to buy ther BS. Lockhead Minion and CHAMP are real doesn’t matter that your head is full of nonsense. And you are still an idiot.

          • Jesus

            Lockhead is full of BS, look at the idiotic products they are putting out at exhorbitant prices, yes US is behind EW and ECM technology because for the last 3-4decades they have been fighting wars of insurgency where EW and ECM capabilities are not needed. The Russians analyzed the weapon systems US used in these wars and they devised inexpensive countermeasures without having to engage in a costly arms race. Maybe you need to read on the Russian EW capabilities displayed in Ukraine against a myriad of forces that included NATO mercenaries. Also, Russian EW capabilities are prevalent in Syria something US cannot do anything about.

            Yes the Russians are more advanced in the EW realm than US, because they started dealing with this technology over 2-3 decades ago, while US chased goat shepherds in Iraq and Afganistan. What Pentagon and Lockheed say, is synonymous to someone whistling while walking through a cemetery at midnight.

          • Jesus

            As far as the stealth, it is costly, it neediness limits the number of sorties the aircraft can fly, and it carries a laughable payload of ordonance. The stealth has not been practically tested against S400, however, I see F22’s staying away from Russian radar in Syria; actions speak louder than BS, if F22 was so invisible and superior they would overfly Russian positions over Syria.

          • Brad Isherwood

            B1B B 2 & F 22 are high maintenance ….reports of F 22 reduction in stealth for every hour of flying.
            War is attrition ratios. ..US would be losing just on the maintenance demand vs Russian aircraft.
            US F 22 or other fighters require tanker to get them near Russia to do the supposed deep strike whatever.
            Good bet Russia knows that Tanker and AWACS are key to US/Nato air opps
            So guess who is going to be hunted with creative determination.
            NATO air bases…fuel and munitions sites will get hammered in first hours of the
            Conflict.
            US then has to rely on multiple tanker set ups to continue strikes into Russia.
            Attrition and loss of stealth for every hour F 22 is forced to go back up = more
            Attrition.
            US/Nato would have to achieve paramount tactical success in first days
            ..or go nuclear…as non nuclear tactical cannot defeat Russia or China for that matter
            In just days.

            Last year’s Kalibre missile launches rocked the military world.
            Russia surprised. …even money they have missiles as good as Python 5 or US
            Load out for tasking.

            Russia is not going to advertise the extent of its radar tracking Jamming or its C4I. .
            You find out via incident…such as Donald Duck…err…USS Donald Cook : )

          • Samuel Turpin

            Most Russian aircraft are almost expendable as far as long-term maintenance goes, compared to American and European aircraft. It’s well-known.

    • Robert Ferrin

      You mean they have the F-35 flying, the last I read it was still loaded with a multitude of problems once you get outside of the propaganda flow and I read just the other day that congress is looking at cutting the funding for its better to cut your loss’s rather than dumping more good money after bad.!!!

      • Tom Johnson

        Your wrong.

        • Robert Ferrin

          Proof if you please.!!!

    • Sinbad2

      That’s just silly, the F16 is a museum piece, over 40 years old only single engined, lousy range etc.
      As for F35’s, well they are faith based, everything is awesome, they just don’t get used, and have no weapons.

    • Kenw6

      The F16 and MIg35 are close enough to where Pilot ability is going to be the determining factor.

      • Tom Johnson

        I just quoted the video. Ditto

    • Jesus

      Again, if F16 and 18 are so superior, where are they in Syria?

      • Tom Johnson

        I just quoted the video.

    • Jesus

      Last I read about F35 was being used as a target designator for the Aegis system. LOL.

  • Samuel Turpin

    Shitty video. Where’s the MiG-31? Fuck you.