Norwegian F-35s against Russian MiG-31s: in a real battle, the victory would have been ours

In the camp of NATO, they are celebrating a victory over Russia, although for now, a virtual one. The Royal Norwegian Air Force announced a “historical event” with pathos: the fifth-generation fighter F-35 Lightning II were able to secretly fly three Russian aircraft, the Tu-142 and the MiG-31 fighter, and then accompany them.

How should you relate to this message?

First, a few words about the characters. Tu-142 is a Russian long-range anti-submarine aircraft. MiG-31 is a fourth generation long-range supersonic fighter-interceptor. And, finally, the main character of the plot is F-35 Lightning II, an inconspicuous fifth-generation fighter-bomber made in America.

Oslo attributes the increase in his defense capability to his appearance in the Norwegian Air Force, judging by the statement of the representative of the country's Ministry of Defense:

Now our Air Force can respond to emergency situations. This shows that we have taken serious and important steps towards obtaining operational benefits from the F-35.

So, the fifth-generation aircraft “outplayed” the fourth-generation aircraft, which is a reason for pride. This is how to be proud of the victory of the "terminator" T-1000 over the T-800. By the way, in that old film it didn’t work out either.

Studying the circumstances of the “historical event” also suggests that everything was not so unambiguous in one gate. F-35 Lightning II turned out to be an expensive car and with a huge number of problems. The specialized American publication Defense News noted that as of 2018, 111 shortcomings of the first category were identified in the fifth-generation aircraft. Subsequently, their number decreased to 63, and then to 13 as of 2019.

Despite assurances from the Pentagon that these problems are not dangerous to pilots, Defense News analysts disagree. Another publication, Business Insider, talks about 883 design flaws. Among them are the possibility of structural damage to the stealth coating at high speeds, increased turbulence and some “squinting” of the airborne gun. Add to this the high cost and complexity of aircraft maintenance. It is estimated that an hour of flight of the F-35 Lightning costs taxpayers $ 24 thousand.

All of these problems are across the throat of the manufacturer of Lockheed Martin Corporation and its customers. Nevertheless, Washington continues to palm out problematic, but very expensive planes to its NATO allies. For example, Norway ordered 52 such winged cars, receiving really 15. What does the manufacturer need to improve sales?

That's right, advertising, and preferably from an uninterested party. The main thing is that nothing breaks. And then it turns out that the American AWACS aircraft helped the Norwegians to "take advantage" of the Russian planes. And so it turns out the plot of the "historical event."

Aircraft AWACS Boeing E-3 Sentry, as well as fighters F-16, F-35 and F / A-18. Photo: Air Education and Training Command

The western forum has long been discussing the problems of the F-35 Lightning II. The local professional audience came to the curious conclusion that without support from AWACS, American aircraft would not have a chance against an equal number of Russian MiG-31s. We will not even touch on the speed characteristics in which our plane simply surpasses the "American" by head. Of course, situations are different in a war, but forum users believe that if the Russians first hit an electronic reconnaissance and tracking plane (one of the MiG-31's destinations), then the F-35 pilots will instantly be “blinded” and will be forced to retreat.
We are open to cooperation with authors in the news and analytical departments. A prerequisite is the ability to quickly analyze the text and check the facts, to write concisely and interestingly on political and economic topics. We offer flexible working hours and regular payments. Please send your responses with examples of work to [email protected]
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
    Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 18 March 2020 15: 35
    Of course, situations are different in a war, but forum users believe that if the Russians first hit an electronic reconnaissance and tracking plane (one of the MiG-31's destinations), then the F-35 pilots will instantly be “blinded” and will be forced to retreat.

    And why? Even if the MIG-31 knocks down AWACS (but who will let him approach it so easily?), It will, with its huge reflecting surface, clearly lose. Well, there would be more advanced weapons, but the R-33, probably, for its time, good missiles with a decent range. But they were intended, as in the main the MIG-31 itself, to intercept targets of something like the B-52. What this "very quickly flying in a straight iron" will do with a very poorly visible F-35, sufficiently maneuverable, possessing AIM-120 missiles, if the latest modification, then with a range of up to 200 km, one can only guess. Here, of course, excellent overclocking characteristics and significantly higher speeds can help. The F-35 is unlikely to catch up.
    1. akarfoxhound Offline akarfoxhound
      akarfoxhound 18 March 2020 22: 03
      Wow! An expert on the sofa MiGar !? Did the owners tell you about the AIM-120D with a launch range of 200 km? Cool! And Che is not "stotyshpyasot" ??? And your version about the R-33, with the "maneuverability" of the 35th, was completely dead! laughing
      I have always been touched by the pretentious conclusions of absolute losers in the topic of aviation, but they have a "professional" opinion.
      laughing laughing laughing
      Find yourself a decent job, a NET daily hollow scoop that draws knowledge from a wiki - it looks rzhachno wink
      1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 19 March 2020 08: 11
        Fortunately, I don’t know the owners, or vice versa. This is the first thing. Second, in the course that you actually used the 31st. For that I respect. And by the way, I’m on you. Then all the same, it is possible to be more specific on points, but it is understandable for "losers", except for your general hysteria? What is completely wrong?
        1. akarfoxhound Offline akarfoxhound
          akarfoxhound 21 March 2020 01: 24
          I apologize for you, but apart from your "conclusions", I have not seen any other hysteria.
          If you are interested in the topic of aviation, go to the Aviaforum, there the guys who trampled on the sky are sitting and most of the topics have already been discussed a million times by professionals. I am also there regularly. Explain even the basics of aviation to an outsider, but to make it clear - more than a dozen pages will go away. It is really funny to read your reflections, but I don’t want to write the same thing in the explanations, and a lot, and frankly too lazy. Well, you have already written about the EPR targets here, the first and main task of the 31st is the destruction and interception of the CD and their carriers. Why carriers? Yes, it is easier and more profitable to blame him with two full "revolvers" until he dismissed them to the RVB. What, then chase each separately? Well, for good taste, "in secret" - our performance characteristics are slightly underestimated, I even worked better on "simple" than on the "fence". For the first time, "in practice", I was pleasantly surprised. This, of course, is on the hardware completely "tared" by specialists. Pindos have the same problem, they have no less hands. If someone in net writes you real numbers like those from the instructions for the combat use of the MiGar, it means balabol, they are still under the stamp. And it is calculated who wrote from where, now by the services - without sweating.
          1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
            Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 21 March 2020 09: 05
            Why carriers? Yes, it is easier and more profitable to blame him with two full "revolvers" until he dismissed them to the RVB.

            - about this, by the way, I wrote about. But this is clear to every student.
    2. g1washntwn Offline g1washntwn
      g1washntwn (George Washington) 19 March 2020 09: 13
      As it were, the MIG was created not only for high-altitude interception, but also for the interception of cruise missiles, which are low-profile flights. And to find a target with an EPR even lower than the estimated F-35 against the background of the earth, you know, that is still a task. This is the question of stealth.
      About missiles: AIM-120D up to 180 km, with the last kilometers being an inertial flight with a limited maneuverability. For a confident defeat, it is necessary to launch much closer than the maximum range, so that the rocket maneuvers on the active rather than the passive site (MBA Meteor is more dangerous in this regard).
      "Analysts" on such virtual victories of the "penguin" in the internet in bulk, do not multiply it with assumptions.
      1. Arkharov Offline Arkharov
        Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov) 19 March 2020 11: 41
        You are quite competent. But the main message of the article is absolutely illiterate:

        ...but forum users They believe that if the Russians first hit an electronic reconnaissance and tracking aircraft (one of the MiG-31 missions), then the F-35 pilots will instantly be “blinded” and will be forced to retreat.
        1. g1washntwn Offline g1washntwn
          g1washntwn (George Washington) 19 March 2020 11: 52
          Without a link from AWACS "stealth" loses its main advantage. With the loss of stealth, of course, he can go on the attack, but with a different alignment of chances. By and large, he is a sniper. There are few cartridges (4 for the "rifle" and 2 for the "pistol", the "knife" cannon without super-maneuverability can be ignored). As soon as the position is illuminated or the gunner is "countered" - there is little sense to fight, you need to quickly crawl away.
    3. maidan.izrailovich (Maidan Izrailovich) 20 March 2020 13: 03
      Arkharov (Grigory Arkharov)
      Well, there would be a better weapon, but the P-33 ...

      The MiG-31 range includes the R-37 missile. Adopted in 2014.

      R-37 (according to NATO codification AA-13 “Arrow”, literally “Arrow”) - a Soviet-Russian air-to-air missile long range.
      Missile length: 4,20 m
      Fuselage Diameter: 0,38m
      Starting weight: 600 kg
      Warhead Weight: 60 kg
      Launch range: more than 300 km

      Breathe out, philosopher. lol
    4. master3 Offline master3
      master3 (Vitali) 31 March 2020 15: 16
      F-35 is unlikely to catch up with him.

      - This phrase is exactly the point. He simply has no choice but to flee, and the faster the better. Only there is doubt, the F-35 may not catch up (does he need it?), But the AIM-120 will catch up for sure.
    5. Oleg Bratkov Offline Oleg Bratkov
      Oleg Bratkov (Oleg Bratkov) 14 November 2020 11: 34
      After the destruction of the AWACS, the F-35 will turn on its radars, and its reflective surface will become completely useless. You see, the power emitted by the F-35 radar is millions of times greater than the power reflected from the F-35 ...
  2. Sergey Latyshev Offline Sergey Latyshev
    Sergey Latyshev (Serge) 18 March 2020 15: 42
    Yes! If they only caught up ... !!! Then we would show them ....
  3. Rus Offline Rus
    Rus 18 March 2020 20: 11
    Undoubtedly! A dagger directly in the forehead!
  4. Binder Offline Binder
    Binder (Miron) 19 March 2020 00: 20
    Fermented patriots again tell each other about the capabilities of Russian weapons and the complete worthlessness of the West - well, the lads will not be able to taste that a cart with a machine gun, even the fastest, does not channel against the tank. lol
  5. g1washntwn Offline g1washntwn
    g1washntwn (George Washington) 19 March 2020 08: 59
    What the "victory" is is absolutely incomprehensible. The planes flew with transponders, no AWACS needed. With the same success, you can "defeat" civilian airbuses every day. In terms of stealth, the F-35 is in a better position while it is "in the shadows" and its missiles receive target data from other sources. As soon as he has to turn on the active capture of targets by his own radar, his invisibility is immediately turned off. The technologies used are supposed to confuse enemy detection systems ... but only they know this. Already around and everywhere far and wide it has been analyzed that the F-35 is good only as a camper sniper, it is these "frags" that are passed off as win.
  6. Tektor Offline Tektor
    Tektor (Tektor) 19 March 2020 12: 30
    They couldn't beat ours anyway. We have an OGRLS "Container", which "sees" any objects over 4 m in the area of ​​responsibility.
    1. g1washntwn Offline g1washntwn
      g1washntwn (George Washington) 19 March 2020 12: 55
      The story was this:

      Mig-31: - Hello to the Norwegians.
      F-35: - Hello Russian.
      They missed each other. A little later, after landing:
      Mig-31: - I saw the Norwegians, they sent greetings.
      F-35: - I saw the Russians and would have won all.
  7. Dzafdet Offline Dzafdet
    Dzafdet (Sergei) 20 March 2020 07: 05
    EPR F-35 of the order of 0,4-0,5 square meters. meter. You can spot it and knock it down. That's just why the MIG-31 should do this? For this drying there is ...
    1. PSih2097 Offline PSih2097
      PSih2097 (Alexander Latvian) 20 March 2020 12: 26
      Quote: Dzafdet
      EPR F-35 of the order of 0,4-0,5 square meters. meter.

      - this is until he opens the weapon hatches to launch the rocket. After, its EPR increases by 2 - 3 times ...

      1. Oleg Bratkov Offline Oleg Bratkov
        Oleg Bratkov (Oleg Bratkov) 14 November 2020 11: 36
        This is as long as the AWACS is alive. But who will give this AWACS a long life, tea, not the Papuans ...
  8. Gadley Offline Gadley
    Gadley (Sergei) 20 March 2020 08: 32
    You read these couch "experts" and you understand how we are used to doing verbiage. On the other hand, grind with your tongue (beat your fingers on the keyboard) do not carry bags. And for the sofa "experts" I explain that each type of aircraft has its own advantages and disadvantages, and also a lot depends on the gasket between the steering wheel and the seat. And only a real battle can show who is right and who is wrong.
  9. Regis Offline Regis
    Regis (Sergey Kopan) 20 March 2020 08: 37
    As already got the couch warriors, who do not know how to wind footcloths, and if they were on the airfield of the airfield, then only before flying to Turkey or Egypt. If we draw an analogy, then in 1941 some "strategists" also counted the number, caliber of guns, mm of armor and armor penetration ... The real battle showed somehow a completely different result, I would say, unexpected, and here the Author and his opponents can cite in paragraphs translations of American advertising brochures and opinions of the same "sofa experts" as they themselves. In any case, they will be very, very far from the truth. Do they amuse their ego.