MIG 41 Interceptor

a reply to: Zaphod58

With our defense acquisition businesses and how black projects can just blow money , I would guess a spaceplane's cost would do so anyway.
At a guess they probably just expose the existing black aircraftfor white and spend the development money on something else they want.

a reply to: cavtrooper7

Black Projects spend a fraction of their white world counterparts. The black budget is nowhere near as big as people believe.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
a reply to: Zaphod58

With our defense acquisition businesses and how black projects can just blow money ,

Well its not exactly a black project but what it is doing is under wraps, but the X-37's are a case in point and you could make the case that it is for all practical purposes a space plane

a reply to: FredT

Its a step but NOT an actual fighter capable aircraft.
What you call it anyway ,Global domininace?
Orbital penetrator?
Areospace superiority?

The Russians have crowing about this for a couple weeks at least. I saw it and thought it was nonsense. That's the reason I didn't post anything here.

Keep in mind two bits.

First, when the Russians started talking the PAK-DA, it was going to be a hypersonic monster, too. Now, it is supposedly a subsonic flying wing.

Secondly, the Russians are going broke faster than an addict at a casino. The PAK-DA has been indefinitely postponed. The Su-57 was supposed to be FOC in 2017, but the Russians have stated production deliveries are still 2 years off. And in the non aviation arena, the T-14 tank will at mist have 120 delivered by 2020. A tank is too expensive for them!

There might be a MiG-31 successor, but I have severe doubts.

a reply to: 727Sky

Basically, he is talking about their building a field vehicle, similar to our black program triangles. How else are you going to fly a jet in space?

Surely, they and the Chinese are seriously working on such craft and probably have prototypes in the air even now. But we have about a 30 year headstart on being fully operational with such devices or hasn't anybody else noticed?

I'm sick of this game of squeezing the American taxpayer harder and harder to pay for maintaining a facade of "what's current in the world in military aviation" as compared to what we really have had for decades. One public crash of a triangle (that I DON"T want to happen) and the F-22's and the F-35's will be as useless as the F-117's.

a reply to: Aliensun

Oh please do go on about how the F-117 was useless.

a reply to: Zaphod58

I dunno zaph. F117 is a fighter plane and it doesnt even have a cannon.

a reply to: Zaphod58

Maybe they're trying to outdo the Mig 25's zoom climb record

From the OPs article...

“[The development] is at the stage of finalizing the image of the plane.

So, this development programme has not really started.

Russia has quite an industry in CGI defence projects. Let's get excited if it ever ends up a 1 in 20 balsa wood model.

Excuse my cynicism, but at the moment this is just aspirational and (for Russia) unachievable. It's for PR consumption.

a reply to: paraphi

Dahir insaat...

Enough said ^^

a reply to: E92M3

If they can't afford to put a 5th gen style one-piece canopy on the Su-57 what hope do they have of a super space plane??

What proportion of 5th generation aircraft have a single piece canopy?

Less than 50%, given the F-35 outnumbers the F-22.

Having a single piece canopy doesn't have anything to do with anything.

I'm very interested in the Concept of Operations (CONOPS) for such an aircraft. Certainly it will not fight like a standard 4th generation fighter or 5th generation fighter.

I certainly think it's possible for Russia to accomplish this - around mach 4 performance - after all the Mig-25 accomplished Mach 2.83 in 1964 and up to Mach 3.2, conditions permitting. Aircraft can be designed using much better tools and built with better materials today than they could in the early 1960s. Also note that the article didn't mention stealth, super-maneuverability, cockpit visibility, short-field takeoffs or affordability. There's a lot to be gained by removing measures that are traditionally associated with modern fighters and instead focusing in a smaller number of parameters, such as speed. In other words, it depends on what they are want to achieve overall - all we know right now is it will go really fast and really high.

Maybe first flight around 2025 is possible, with a large amount of existing technology (avionics, engines), if other aspects of the program other than speed are not ambitious.

a reply to: C0bzz
May be they will work on a J-58 style engine , If this airplane is classified it will be difficult to find real informations but they spoke about Mig 41 since 2013.

a reply to: C0bzz
I tend to agree with you C0bzz, while I think this is a certain amount of bluster, building such an aircraft from existing technology would be possible if as you say you remove some of the more extreme requirements. I remember seeing a discussion on another website a couple of years back where an engineer postulated exactly what it would take and how/where you would need to operate it. Turns out that if you push the operational ceiling towards 150k+ ft, obtaining sustained Mach numbers of M4+ is possible with surprising relatively low thrust engines. The real trick is getting there but rocket boosters as I recall played a part in getting you up to that altitude before dropping away. Not saying its easy but it would be possible, certainly the US could achieve it.

originally posted by: BASSPLYR
a reply to: Zaphod58

I dunno zaph. F117 is a fighter plane and it doesnt even have a cannon.

Come on Bassplyr.......please tell me you're taking the Mick and want one of us to bite :-)

Stratsys says to himself...don't bite...don't bite....don't bite