No material I know mentions, what type of RWR it is but I guess it is L150 Pastel. Saab Avitronics presented systems for the MKM last year and enlisted then only MAW300, LWS310 and EW controller (EWC).
.
Thanks Piotr, …what you think about the MAW300 installation? Does it really cover 360degree in azimuth and elevation? I think there will be a small blind zone for the sensors directly in front of the aircraft. I`d install some of the MAW sensors far, far from the fuselage, e.g. at the wing tips when possible of course. It would need a little redesign of the wing tips carrying missile launch rails.
Martinez come on!!!, after looking houndreds of thousands of times Su-17/22, MiG-17/19/21/23 and so, and you tell me those installations looks ugly? :p 😉
…because you`re provoking me;) , I prepared a control question for you. Want to see how you have been familiarized with those new toys of yours. What are these color dots used for? :diablo:
please, do not help him guys….:D
🙂 …and what kind of antenna is this? Is it the 0.7-40GHz antenna of RWS-300 system or the antenna of Sirena/Pastel RWR system. Again compare photos from Su-30MKM and Su-27SKM.
here is the pdf document about the RWS-50/RWS-300.
http://products.saabgroup.com/PDBWebNew/GetFile.aspx?PathType=ProductFiles&FileType=Files&Id=5072
Su-30MKM has six sensors of the MAW300 ultraviolet missile approach system in two groups of three “windows” each, one ahead of front leg (to cover lower hemisphere) and another one on the fuselage back (upper hemisphere).
Laser warning LWS310 system has four sensors: two front-looking ones at the wing roots below the edge and two rear looking ones at the engine intakes’ sides.
Why the “hatches” are covered with metal plates? I may only guess that no real systems are fitted yet.
As I know, jammer is from Russia, but no idea of the model.
Do these antennas on the MKM fins and wing LE belong to the SAAB RWS-50 system or to the Russian Sirena/Pastel RWR system? You can compare with pics taken at Paris Lebourget2005, with the Su-27SKM on static display. Apparently, when looking MKM cockpit pictures they are not using that standalone RWS-50 color display projecting data from both RWS-50 and MAW-300. Probably, output from those systems is presented on one of three MFD screens installed in the cockpit.
RWS-50 info
http://www.avitronics.co.za/Airborne/radar.htm
MAW-300 info
http://www.avitronics.co.za/Airborne/maw300.htm
Avitronics EW products
http://www.saabgroup.com/en/Capabilities/electronic_warfare.htm
http://www.avitronics.co.za/products.htm
thx martinez,what the title of this magazine?
http://kagero.pl/product_info.php?cPath=38_40&products_id=287
That is the ugliest installation of west avionics on the Flanker airframe ever seen. I do not like those bumps on the nose and spine. They`ve spent some effort to improve surface finish of the front fuselage, now everything’s gone to $#!^. Wonder, when they install something even more “boxier” on the flanker aiframe.
Slovakian MiG-29 with new IFF
The AN/APX-113 IFF interrogator/transponder. Forgot to mention that Slovakian Migs should play some role in the possible Polish/RSK deal.
thx flex
Russia offered the new multifunction colour display MFI-54 to replace the oldest for Slovakian MiG-29,my question:what about the old IPV-31 CRT display of Polish MiG-29?
The most significant modification the RSK Mig is offering to Poland is the implementation of the MIL-STD data bus 1553B, which means an open architecture for future avionics upgrades. I do not have a clue how the Polish Mig-29 upgrade will look like, I think it has not been decided yet, but when they sign the deal with the RSK they could also get 4000h for airframes, on-condition maintenance aproved by manufacturer and better self-diagnostics system to lower Fulcrum depot maintenance time/flight costs. Of course, when they decide for further avionics upgrade they can get rid off the old IPV screen and obtain whatever they want, new MFDs or a new radar,.. etc. It all depends on the money and as it seems Poland is a very reach country when they can afford brand new but unreliable US stuff.
Pictures from another Polish Mig-29 publication, you can recognize new instrument panel in the cockpit.
Martinez, looks like he needs translation. 😉
thanks, but almost every second word in that Polish text is an international word, I was hoping no one needs translation.:diablo:
Martinez, please note that this is an international forum, so please speak english, cause not everyone (incl. me) can read polish and i do like to know more about this to 😎
Honestly, tell me again if that Polish text really doesn`t make any sense to you?:eek: I was helping him to find the information, because he is not able to use google or wikipedia. I did copy and paste from this website. http://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/MiG-29
What about this page scanned from Polish Mig-29 publication, should I also translate this to english for you?
:confused:
thx
Why confused:rolleyes: Anything I forgot? The IFF is a Polish made Radwar SC-10 Suprasl.
hi,what is the most advanced equipment was fitted to the Polish AF MiG-29(9-12A)?and why there are two IFF antennas type fitted into port side in front of the wind screen(you can see the different kinds between MiG-29_77 and MiG-29_59)?and what about the cockpit-new instruments?
thx
Samoloty 1. eskadry ponad standardowe wyposażenie wersji 9.12A wyposażone zostaÅ‚y w systemu nawigacji Rockwell Collins ANV-241MMR VOR/ILS oraz AN/ARN-153 (TCN 500) TACAN, (cywilny) odbiornik GPS Trimble 2101AP, urzÄ…dzenie ostrzegania o opromieniowaniu wiÄ…zkÄ… radarowÄ… Thompson-CSF SB-14, polski system identyfikacji swój-obcy (IFF) Radwar SC-10 Suprasl oraz cyfrowy pulpit sterowania R-862 do radiostacji VHF/UHF Unimor-Radiocom RS 6113-2. Poza tym maszyny otrzymaÅ‚y Å›wiatÅ‚a antykolizyjne oraz nowy – “NATOwski” kamuflaż. Systemy nawigacyjne GPS, TACAN i VOR/ILS zostaÅ‚y zintegrowane z systemem nawigacyjnym samolotu poprzez interfejs TGR-29A.
Martinez, why to use two instead of just one captive training unit (those R-73 training missiles whose name now I don’t remind)…is for some aerodynamic factor?…
I suppose those were ACT training sorties isn’t?
Didn’t you have anything like an ACMI pod for such sorties?, or the UZR-73 (is that the name?) made the same work?
No, just to make it easier(the ACT sortie) and more comfortable for pilots flying the UB with the UZR-60, bcs the UZR-60(R-60) has shorter R-max compared to UZR-73(R-73), when flying with one UZR-60 the front fuselage shields the missile seeker and that would require turning harder, so they`ve attached another UZR-60. No other pod is needed, just the UZR which is probably the same as the ACMI in the west.
You`re right. For illustration I`ve found these “Russian” Mig-29 pics. I`m not a Flanker fan, I`m sorry.:D
]





Pit; What’s your opinion on this man’s opinion on Venezuelan Su-30 pilots?
(It’s the War Nerd from Moscow’s expat newspaper “The Exile”)
http://www.exile.ru/2006-October-06/venezuela_enchilada_of_evil.html
First sentences from that article evoke saying “Evil should be fought with evil”, so I`m keeping my fingers crossed for Hugo.