Opinion of the Mig 31

[Haavarla]

gf0012-aust;204813]I'm getting frustrated because I have to point out the obvious - and you don't seem to understand how militaries actually fight,

that is blatantly apparent as you persistently misunderstand doctrine issues.
no amount of backchat changes this.

And likewise i tired of your two-ways monologe posting style.
Care to link me where i misunderstod any doctrine issues?
And pls do keep it in context.

if you don't understand basic engagement constructs then you'll struggle to understand joint engagement issues. (your comments about how Link 16 works and its equivalence in russian terms reinforces this) Link16 is an ALS capability. The Mig31's is not - you have quoted air elements between air services. I'm happy to be corrected by Feanor because he will at least have a clue re this. You however have not provided an answer that demonstrates that you actually understand basic comms systems

No prob. Russian Data link do not have ALS capability.
This mean it is ineffective?

Mig-31 Russian data links:
Mission: In four-aircraft group interception mission, only lead MiG-31 is linked to AK-RLDN automatic guidance network on ground; other three MiG-31s have APD-518 digital datalink to lead aircraft, permitting line-abreast radar sweep of zone 430 to 485 n miles (800 to 900 km; 495 to 560 miles) wide by 140? sector scanning angles. Semi-retractable Type 8TP IR search/track sensor under cockpit; tactical situation display. BAN-75 command link; APD-518 digital air-to-air datalink; Raduga-Bort-MB5U15K air-to-ground tactical datalink; SPO-155L RHAWS; Argon-15 digital computer.The MiG-31 was designed to operate in those areas where there is no ground-based radar coverage, such as the north, using its sophisticated onboard systems for autonomous operations MiG-31s are most often used in group of four (or even eight), linked together by datalink. Operating together, four MiG-31s can cover a strip of territory 900 km (560 miles) across, and targets can be transferred rapidly from one aircraft to another, with all aircraft sharing the same image on their tactical situation displays. The transmission of target information between aircraft by datalink reduces the vulnerability to hostile jamming, while the radar's, angular tracking circuits are hard to deceive. Information denied by hostile jamming can be recovered using kinematic and triangulation methods. The aircraft is provided with secure digital datalinks to the ground (AK-RLDN) and between aircraft (APD-518). Conformal antennas for these are located respectively in the leading edges of the ventral fins and on the sides of the nose (three per side) and rear fuselage (two). The aircraft's datalinks and powerful radar also allow the MiG-31 to act as a 'mini AWACS' in its own right, directing and controlling other fighters. The lead navigator in a flight of four MiG-31s can even directly steer his wingmen's aircraft, since their autopilots can receive his commands via datalink. Radar is not, however, the MiG-31's only target acquisition and tracking sensor.

its about platform relevance, its about system coherency.

Which the article i posted stated.

ps, the russians themselves state that Glonass is not at the full constellation levels that they need to have full global ability - ie it has degraded. hence why they're looking at Indian co-participation because they need another partner to assist.

btw, to get full tailgating capability for a satellite constellation, you need at least 13 and preferably 27 satellites.

13 satellites only allows for 2 hour passes and only allows about 10 minutes of redundancy for the tailgater...anything else but these numbers means that you don't have a constellation - you have a regional grid

Agreed, but it cover Russias territory.

 

[gf0012-aust]

for goodness sake.

we have covered ad-nauseum the fact that the Mig-31 does not act like a mini -AWACs, hence the earlier discussion by not only myself, but others familiar with combat data systems that its a variation of the function that is offered by link 16. If the Mig31 is a mini awacs then so is the Gripen, Rafale, F-16nn, F15nn, F/A-18nn etc...

you claim to be knowledagable about the damn aircrafts capabilities but then trot out the nonsensical mini-AWACs comment again.

Abe has explained this again, and it has been dealt with before on this forum.

you clearly are quoting things without comprehending the actual capability.

you clearly love the Mig-31. I'm happy for you, but try not to be a fan boy and confuse real technical issues and the discussions around those issues than your compulsive need to go and bat for this platform as though someone is offending your nearest and dearest relative.

 

[Feanor]

ps, the russians themselves state that Glonass is not at the full constellation levels that they need to have full global ability - ie it has degraded. hence why they're looking at Indian co-participation because they need another partner to assist.

I'll stop you right there. India partnership is being actively promoted for financial reasons. I.e. Russia wants to make money off of GLONASS, not because of lack of domestic capability. Russia is also seeking similar GLONASS usage partnership agreements with Venezuela, and potentially the entire CSTO. If the funds are made available, and current sattelite launch tempo seems to indicate that they are, then the GLONASS constellation can be increased to the levels you mention within the next 2 years, if not sooner. Otherwise however you are correct. GLONASS does not even have full global coverage yet. It's set to technically have full global coverage for navigational purposes by the end of this year as the satellites waiting to enter the system become operational.

No prob. Russian Data link do not have ALS capability.
This mean it is ineffective?

Mig-31 Russian data links:
Mission: In four-aircraft group interception mission, only lead MiG-31 is linked to AK-RLDN automatic guidance network on ground; other three MiG-31s have APD-518 digital datalink to lead aircraft, permitting line-abreast radar sweep of zone 430 to 485 n miles (800 to 900 km; 495 to 560 miles) wide by 140? sector scanning angles. Semi-retractable Type 8TP IR search/track sensor under cockpit; tactical situation display. BAN-75 command link; APD-518 digital air-to-air datalink; Raduga-Bort-MB5U15K air-to-ground tactical datalink;

Tactical in what sense? What tactical level PVO, or SV formations have a compatible datalink, or can even make use of the data? More interestingly, what kind of data can it transmit? How secure is it? I've been able to find nothing of substance on this piece of equipment, infact Russian sources seem practically oblivious to it's existence. I seriously doubt it's Link-16 comparable.

I'll give you a more detailed reply to Haavarlas essay in a little bit. For now I'll say this, AK-RLDN mainly refers to the A-50, and only rarely to GBAD. The Raduga tactical air-ground datalink... tactical in what sense? What tactical level formations have the equipment needed to receive and make use of the data it can give them? More importantly... what data can it give them?

 

[gf0012-aust]

I'll stop you right there. India partnership is being actively promoted for financial reasons. I.e. Russia wants to make money off of GLONASS, not because of lack of domestic capability. Russia is also seeking similar GLONASS usage partnership agreements with Venezuela, and potentially the entire CSTO. If the funds are made available, and current sattelite launch tempo seems to indicate that they are, then the GLONASS constellation can be increased to the levels you mention within the next 2 years, if not sooner. Otherwise however you are correct. GLONASS does not even have full global coverage yet. It's set to technically have full global coverage for navigational purposes by the end of this year as the satellites waiting to enter the system become operational.

the seeking of not only financial partners, but geographically dispersed parners would make sense, as without it they cannot develop at the speed they need.

the last set of info I received re GLONASS was about 10 months ago, and at that point, in current demand and build rates they didn't expect to have a full global constellation up within 11 years. that was based on extant decay to build rates.

the only way to change that is to bring in extra launch partners or have a fundamental change at the local level.

the russians are probably more motivated as they can probably see that the chinese will also be onselling their own system to probably the same potential partners (except for India of course)

 

[Feanor]

the seeking of not only financial partners, but geographically dispersed parners would make sense, as without it they cannot develop at the speed they need.

the last set of info I received re GLONASS was about 10 months ago, and at that point, in current demand and build rates they didn't expect to have a full global constellation up within 11 years. that was based on extant decay to build rates.

the only way to change that is to bring in extra launch partners or have a fundamental change at the local level.

the russians are probably more motivated as they can probably see that the chinese will also be onselling their own system to probably the same potential partners (except for India of course)

At a launch rate of 6-9 sattelites per year? I'm sorry this doesn't add up with what I've observed over the last several years. Unless the GLONASS program is about to take a major financial hit, it appears to be on track to having a global constellation within a few years. Are we talking about GLONASS-M or GLONASS-K?

Here is the latest update on Mig-31 airbases in the new RuAF structure:

3958th Air Base Savasleyka (former 4th TsBP i PLS)
6977th Air Base Bol'shoye Savino (former 764th IAP)


And the Mig-31BM is dest for new airbase structure:
6968th Air Base Olenya (former 458th IAP) Current units Mig-31BM unknown, planned numbers 12

6968th Airbase Khotilovo (former Sokol) planned units 24

There is also a small nr of Mig-31BMs at Lipetsk airbase.
One or both of the top Mig-31 airbases could be structured/closed in the future.
Mixed Air Bases are also beeing created, resulting in the direct co-ordination of PVO Su-27 and Mig-31 fighters.
The previous Northern fleet Air Base at Olenya will be re-designed as the 6959th Air Base.
Concurrently the 9thIAP PVO at Kilp-Yavr(Su-27) and the 458 IAP PVO at Kotlas(Mig-31) will be transfeered to Olenya.
The Contigent of mixed sq will consist of one sq Su-27 and two sq of Mig-31.

Note that the the old Air regiments are now gone in the RuAF structure, Sq level is the new concept.
In term of infrastructure, it is estimated that more than two-dozen military Air Bases will eighter be closed down or converted into civilian usage.

Can you post a source for the above, as well as (if you have them) the MSB commands for the airbases?

The mini-AWACS comments is not non-sensical. It's just a testament to just how lacking the VVS currently is in datalink capability, and how much of an exception the MiG-31 is in that sense. A capability that is commonplace, standard even, in European airforces, here is exceptional and considered very advanced.

EDIT: So after a bit more thinking, the MiG-31 does appear to have datalink with some ground assets. However the types of comms necessary seem to be something only major staionary airfields, and MSB headquarters level would have. They technically could communicate with GBAD, but it would be through 1-2 other central nodes, such as an A-50, or above mentioned headquarters, which would then communicate to a brigade or btln level SAM command element, which could then give the data to the individual units. However given the cumbersome nature of this system, it's not something that appears capable (in real terms) of providing firing solutions to a SAM system from a MiG-31 radar. So the capability here is present but highly undeveloped and rather awkward. There is no ability to communicate horizontally among the various assets directly.

 

[gf0012-aust]

At a launch rate of 6-9 sattelites per year? I'm sorry this doesn't add up with what I've observed over the last several years. Unless the GLONASS program is about to take a major financial hit, it appears to be on track to having a global constellation within a few years. Are we talking about GLONASS-M or GLONASS-K?.

In sat version terms, K amd M are regarded as discrete constellations unless one is superceding the other. If one is superceding the other then you have version, change and capability control differences.

if they are complimentary then you look at overlap and the overlap means that what you have then is 3 regional constellations.

ie K, overlap and M

the question is whether the iterations are developmental? are they operating at the same orbit? do they track manage? do they target assist? do they operate over discretionary tracks? eg what is the functional difference between K and M

unless the russians have made major changes and investments in the last 18months (and Putin did have that intention), and considering the issue of iterative models, then I still struggle to see these as one and the same constellation and that if they are then there are functional differences between versions.

If K=M then they would be on track - but what is the capability difference and gap between the two that makes them kissing cousins within the same orbit?

 

[Feanor]

In sat version terms, K amd M are regarded as discrete constellations unless one is superceding the other. If one is superceding the other then you have version, change and capability control differences.

They're considered the same constellation, with the K version being newer then the M version. The GLONASS-K is set to replace the GLONASS-M satellites completely, but they are completely interoperable as far as I know. To the best of my current knowledge, the first 3 satellites for GLONASS-K are being launched in December. Russian press, military, and all sources I can find, treat them as identical and completely interoperable, with the distinction that the GLONASS-K provides better signal.

if they are complimentary then you look at overlap and the overlap means that what you have then is 3 regional constellations.

ie K, overlap and M

the question is whether the iterations are developmental? are they operating at the same orbit? do they track manage? do they target assist? do they operate over discretionary tracks? eg what is the functional difference between K and M

I'm sorry, far beyond my knowledge. I only have open-sources info on this.

unless the russians have made major changes and investments in the last 18months (and Putin did have that intention), and considering the issue of iterative models, then I still struggle to see these as one and the same constellation and that if they are then there are functional differences between versions.

If K=M then they would be on track - but what is the capability difference and gap between the two that makes them kissing cousins within the same orbit?

Good questions. Officially the main differences are a new better FDMA L-band navigation signal, longer life-time (10-12 years) and lower weight, as well as 2 possible CDMA access signals. (interesting, albeit dated article here: Russia Approves CDMA Signals for GLONASS, Discussing Common Signal Design | Inside GNSS )

I suspect that it's a far more accurate system then the GLONASS-M variant, which provides military signal accuracy 10-20 meters, and civilian signals within 100m. Vague claims of matching GPS performance by 2012, I would take with a grain of salt.

Another interesting tid-bit I found is that apparently there were plans for improving the military-grade signal accuracy to 5.5m by 2010 (i.e. by right now), which might've been related to the M replacing the original first-gen Uragan satellites. Whether this has happened... I don't know.

РоÑкоÑÐ¼Ð¾Ñ Ð¾Ð±ÐµÑ‰Ð°ÐµÑ‚ повыÑить точноÑÑ‚ÑŒ работы ГЛОÐÐСС Ñ 10 до 5,5 метроÐаука | Лента новоÑтей "РИРÐовоÑти"

 

[Haavarla]

Feanor;204849]
Can you post a source for the above, as well as (if you have them) the MSB commands for the airbases?

The mini-AWACS comments is not non-sensical. It's just a testament to just how lacking the VVS currently is in datalink capability, and how much of an exception the MiG-31 is in that sense. A capability that is commonplace, standard even, in European airforces, here is exceptional and considered very advanced.

EDIT: So after a bit more thinking, the MiG-31 does appear to have datalink with some ground assets. However the types of comms necessary seem to be something only major staionary airfields, and MSB headquarters level would have. They technically could communicate with GBAD, but it would be through 1-2 other central nodes, such as an A-50, or above mentioned headquarters, which would then communicate to a brigade or btln level SAM command element, which could then give the data to the individual units. However given the cumbersome nature of this system, it's not something that appears capable (in real terms) of providing firing solutions to a SAM system from a MiG-31 radar. So the capability here is present but highly undeveloped and rather awkward. There is no ability to communicate horizontally among the various assets directly.

Its an eight pages article from Combat Aircraft Monthly, June 2010 edition.

Long-Range Aviation Command 37th Air Army VGK SN*

Miliyary Transport Aviation Command 61st Air Army VGK*

Strategic Operation Command of Air and Space Defence OSK VKO, HQ Moscow*
Moscow Military District (MVO)
4th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO) HQ Dolgooprudnyy, Moscow Oblast
5th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO) HQ Petrovskoye
6th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO) HQ Dorotshovo or Rzhev

1st Air and Air Defence Forces Command, HQ St Petersburg*
Leningrad Military District(LVO)
1st Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Severomaorsk
2nd Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Tosno or Khvoyni
Kaliningrad Special Defence Region (KOR)
3rd Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Kaliningrad

2nd Air and Air degence Forces Command, HQ Chita*
Volga-Ural Military District (PuVO)
8th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Yekaterinburg
Siberian Military District (SibVO)
9th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Ob, Novosibirsk Oblast
10th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Chita

3rd Air and Air-defence Forces Command, HQ Khabarovsk*
Far Eastern District (DVO)
11th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Komsomolsk-on-Amur
12th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Nakhodka, Vladivostok Oblast
14th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Yelizovo, Petropavlovsk-Kamchatskiy

4th Air and Air-Defence Forces Command, HQ Rostov-on-Don*
North Caucasian District (SKVO)
7th Air and Space Defence Brigade (Br VKO), HQ Rostov-on-Don

* Direct-reporting units of the Supreme High Command (VGK)

 

[Feanor]

Wonderful. Now if you could connect this table to the table of Mig-31 airbases, it would be very helpful.

 

[Haavarla]

A bit tricky for me, not that familiar with Russian City Location and current regions, sorry.
Perhaps other are.

3958th Air Base Savasleyka Mig-31
6977th Air Base Bol'shoye Savino Mig-31
6979th Air Base Kansk Mig-31

And for new RuAF procurments.
6959th Air Base Olenya Mig-31BM
6968th Air Base Khotilovo Mig-31BM

As i mention earlier, some of the top three Mig-31 Air Bases could get the axed within the next 6 years. The RuAF Re-structuring is an ongoing prossess.

On a side note:
4th TsBP i PLS Air base Liptesk Su-27SM
6989th Air Base Tsentralnaya Uglovaya Su-27SM
6987th Air Base Dzemgi Su-27SM
6967th Air Base Chkalovsk Su-27SM
7000th Air Base Voronezh Su-34
6968th Air Base Khotilovo Su-35S

 

[Feanor]

You misunderstood me I think. Anyways, I'm seriously doubting that there are only 3 bases with MiG-31 left. How many airframes are at each base?

Also if the Su-34 indeed are at Voronezh, then there's less then a squadron there, which would be inconsistent with VVS practice to re-arm by squadron. The Su-35S has not yet been delivered. First serial airframe is finishing up right now. Finally the SM only exist in 48-60 units (I'm not sure what the status of the last SM order is but it's probably completed). Are you suggesting that those 5 squadrons are at 4 different airbases?

 

[Haavarla]

Some of these Re-structuring Air Bases are completed, and some of the Re-structureing has yet to be done.
Thought this beeing obvious..
Of course there is few Su-34 and Su-35S units, they are still under production.
Its the Future RuAF Air base structure i was posting, not how many units.

I don't have all the figures, what i do have is this:

The former 530th IAP PVO at Sokolovka will be deactivated.
Its Mig-31s will then be devided between the 6989th Air Base at tsentralnaya Uglovaya and the 6990th Air Base at Yelisova.
The 6990th Air Base will then become the largest Mig-31 Air Base in Russia.
Consisting of three whole sq of Mig-31, it will assume responsibility for Air Defence aganst Canada and US(Alaska Region).

The 6989th Air Base at Tsentralnaya Uglovaya will Deploy a mixed contigent of one sq og Mig-31 and two sq of Su-27SM.

On top of this there are the other Mig-31 Air Bases i mention and the Mig-31BM at Kotilovo and Olenya.

The new RuAF Tactical Aviation formation will consist of:
15 Sq Su-27.
14 Sq of Su-25.
14 Sq of Su-24.
12 Sq of Mig-31.

In these figure there are Sq in reserves and the upgraded SM, BM, M2 units too.
These figures will shrink in the future.

 

[Feanor]

That can't be right. There were only 5 regiments of active Foxhounds so they'd have to re-activate airframes, but as many as 10 regiments of active Frogfoots and I'm really doubtful they're retiring a quarter of the CAS fleet. You also missed the Fulcrums entirely. There's no way they're all being retired. I really want to see the source on this...

As for the Su-35S, once again there are 0 in service. None. Not a single one. First one is to be handed over either end of this year, or early next. I suspect what you posted is not the current VVS structure, but a proposed one.

 

[Haavarla]

It is planned to materilize in 2015.
Khotilovo 6968th Air Base will then have 24 aka two Sq Mig-31BM in 2015.
It is not yet clear how many units Olenya 6959th Air Base will get.

 

[Feanor]

It is planned to materilize in 2015.
Khotilovo 6968th Air Base will then have 24 aka two Sq Mig-31BM in 2015.
It is not yet clear how many units Olenya 6959th Air Base will get.

Maybe. But I'm not keeping my fingers crossed. It's pretty unlikely they'll retire the entire Fulcrum fleet without any replacement, leaving the fighter force down to 27 Sq., from 34. Especially with current projected budget growth, and MiG-35 currently being on order. They're certainly not retiring the brand new SMTs that the VVS got instead of Algeria. And you're claiming that this structure will shrink further...

This looks like somebody's bold idea of what VVS structure should or could look like, as opposed to official VVS plans. Not to mention they rarely disclose the real stuff.

 

[Haavarla]

I forgot to put up the SMT's, sorry.
Their in the 2015 planned RuAF re-structuring.

"The 6963rd Air Base at Kursk is the new home to the former Algerian AF Mig-29SMT and UBT's. By the end of 2010 the RuAF hope to operate two Sq each eqipped with upgraded Mig-29SMTs"

But all the others Mig-29 is or going to be mothballed, not even put on reserve storage.
They simply don't fit in and not up to the RuAF requirements any more.

We have all read the news last year about the Russian Mod going to sack a bunch of RuAF personel, equpment, units and Airbases.
Nothing chocking with this report.

The Su-24 Fencer C is also getting axed.
The last two dozen units will be operated by the 6970th Air Base at Morosovsk, to where the 1st GvIBAP from Lebyashe transferred its last 17 operational Su-24s last year before beeing disbanded.

From now on the Su-24M, MR and M2 replace the Fencer C.

Russia most modern frontal bomber Regiment, the 302nd BAP at Pereyaslavak, will be transferred to Khuba and redesignated as the 6988th Air Base, responsible for four Sq of Su-24M and Su-24M2.
The 523rd BAP at Vozzhaevka is to be deactivated.
Its frontal bombers will be scrapped and one Sq of Su-24MRs will be transferred to the 6985th Air Base at Varfolomeyecka.
The Former 799th Independent Recon Air Regiment station at Varfolomeyecka will increase in size, with its three Sq exclusivly deploying Su-24MRs.

Its allso a lot about the Su-25 units and Air Bases beeing transferred, disbanded and so on..

 

[Feanor]

I forgot to put up the SMT's, sorry.
Their in the 2015 planned RuAF re-structuring.

"The 6963rd Air Base at Kursk is the new home to the former Algerian AF Mig-29SMT and UBT's. By the end of 2010 the RuAF hope to operate two Sq each eqipped with upgraded Mig-29SMTs"

But all the others Mig-29 is or going to be mothballed, not even put on reserve storage.
They simply don't fit in and not up to the RuAF requirements any more.

I would love to see a source that all Fulcrums, except two Sq's of SMTs are getting scrapped. You're talking about over 1/4 of the fighter force. There's no replacement for it at the moment, unless they plan on leaving the Flankers in service, with SM2 upgrades, and making entire new units out of the Su-35S and MiG-35. But that would be problematic in terms of the airframe resource. It also makes little sense in the context of the MiG-31 remaining in service.

So, once again, sources. Without them your claims look far fetched at best.

Something doesn't add up here. Either there is a huge problem with the entire MiG-29 fleet, so huge that it's beyond repair or modernization, or this is just plain wrong.

We have all read the news last year about the Russian Mod going to sack a bunch of RuAF personel, equpment, units and Airbases.
Nothing chocking with this report.

The Su-24 Fencer C is also getting axed.
The last two dozen units will be operated by the 6970th Air Base at Morosovsk, to where the 1st GvIBAP from Lebyashe transferred its last 17 operational Su-24s last year before beeing disbanded.

From now on the Su-24M, MR and M2 replace the Fencer C.

I didn't know there were any baseline Su-24 left. About time they ditched them. I don't recall how many Su-24 regiments were active before the reforms, but it was something like 5-7.

Russia most modern frontal bomber Regiment, the 302nd BAP at Pereyaslavak, will be transferred to Khuba and redesignated as the 6988th Air Base, responsible for four Sq of Su-24M and Su-24M2.
The 523rd BAP at Vozzhaevka is to be deactivated.
Its frontal bombers will be scrapped and one Sq of Su-24MRs will be transferred to the 6985th Air Base at Varfolomeyecka.
The Former 799th Independent Recon Air Regiment station at Varfolomeyecka will increase in size, with its three Sq exclusivly deploying Su-24MRs.

Its allso a lot about the Su-25 units and Air Bases beeing transferred, disbanded and so on..

I believe that at least 1 whole regiment was re-armed with M2. I don't know which unit it was, but there was at least 24 M2 mods completed. Was the 302nd BAP a 3-Sq regiment? Or am I missing something here?

 

[Haavarla]

I don't have any more on the Su-24M/M2's.
I belive a number of airbases will be re-enforced with aditional Squadrons as other bases and former regiments structure is phased out of service.

But it remains to see how much of the Su-24M/M2 fleet will decrease here.
Some units must have more service hour than other units, and within the next 4-5 years the Su-34 entering the arena, its a given the there will be some reduction in Squadron level.
Probably the Su-24M variant will go first.

 

[Feanor]

Waiting on you for a source. If this is official, it shouldn't be hard to provide.

 

[Haavarla]

At the end of 2009, early 2010 the RuAF Mig-29 fleet is counting 10 Squadrons.
Now this include the two SMT's Squadrons.

But in what operational service status are the eight older Mig-29 Squadrons at now?
Are there ANY potencial upgrade programs for these birds and to what end?
Most of the Mig-29 Airframes are not in a good situation right now.

The RuAF inventory is beeing reduced through a process of phasing out, mothballing of aircraft in storage depots, and a gradual overhaul of some units thoughout the RuAF.

By 2015, there will not be many Legacy Mig-29 left in the RuAF inventory, if any..
They will be replaced by Flankers as Russia Tactical aviation frontline units, and later on the Flankers will slowly be replaced by Pak-Fa.


Source Combat Aircraft Monthly
Story by Stefan Buttner

Combat Aircraft Magazine | Back Issues | Volume 11