I wonder what the vulnerability of UCAVs being jammed “their control signals” or if worse, being controlled elsewhere
is it me or has every VTOL combat aircraft has had a severe lack of range? some how I remain skeptical of the F-35B variant.
India could have ordered MICA, the French never seemed to have issues selling them weapons.
Mica for their Su-30MKIs? What radar do you think they should’ve installed on their Flankers then? The idea of a Flanker laden with Mica, Storm Shadow and the new French “JDAM” does seem very nice though 🙂
good find Srbin! Is it me or does it seem that Yakovlev designs tend to look more “stealthy” (by American standards) in comparison to what Mig and Sukhoi puts out, case in point is the MFI models.
I am sure the US is aware of this, but rather than use a manned fighter solution, it’s using new supersonic UCAVs such as the X-45C.
the benefits?
-unmanned crew = no need for a canopy and systems to ensure human survival, no need for hmds, cockpit displays etc. thus a dramatic savings in weight, size, complexity and costs.
the result, you have a cost effective, cheap and simple modern aircraft that could be bought in numbers and developed into specific role variants. You then can have a manned aircraft such as an F-22, etc (might be better if it was a two seater) to help guide things.
but personally.. I would rather prefer a solution that had a human pilot.
Personally, if I was making acquisitions for an air force.
I would choose those surplus MiG-29s and have them upgraded to SMT standards.. why?
1. The era of 4th generation aircraft is beginning to come to an end.
2. In general, there hasn’t been too much air combat in general. Because of this, we should be looking for more of an interrim fighter rather than a brand new aircraft. the MiG-29SMT will be cheaper and can do the job for now until the PAK-FA comes out. I would put some money on that.
3. in areas that do have some kind of combat, it’s usually insurgents, etc.. Venezuela can probably make some deal with Brazil for armed Tucano’s for this role.
So why risk all the strings and problems for slightly?
If the target is further away then you just use inflight refuelling… if you still can’t reach it then you use a real strike aircraft like an Su-34, Su-24, or Tu-22M3. Currently the Russians have plenty of strike aircraft in the form of the Su-24 and don’t need the Mig-29 to do that job. What they do need the Mig-29 for is the air defence role, which it performs well enough to not even warrant the M2 model being bought. The M2 model does however add various weapons the Hornet doesn’t have like long range IR guided missiles in the form of the R-27ET and of course the new passive radiation homing air to air variants of the R-27E.
Which is true, Russia knows best on what it needs for it’s own defenses, etc. but when it comes to export, that may be a different issue.. we don’t expect Yemen, Yugoslavia, etc to have the advantage of h aving dedicated strikers, they will just have to settle for multirole. (is Iran and Algeria the only MiG-29 operators that also operate the Su-24?)
can’t wait for pics! I wonder if they’ll continue to use the same camouflage as the Russians. So I’m assuming this variant is the one we saw in Maks 2003?
did Spain ever paint their EF-18’s in a brown mud camouflage like they did with their Mirage F1s in the 80s?
My comparision is right. Integration of large number of weopons does not mean that Radar is more advanced or capable.
Srbin is comparing Su-30MK with MIG-29M. ZHUK-ME is Slot array radar while Su-30MKK uses old casegrain antenna has no SAR or MTI modes nor it supports multi-targeting beyond 2 aircrafts. Su-30MK is also analog FBW. There is 90% commonality between MIG-29M and MIG-29K so price should be similar. Su-30MKI and Su-35 are priced higher and different aircraft.
again flawed
especially since you failed to differentiate which Su-30, you simply stated, Su-30MK, which is not in operation with any air force, there is only the MKK, MKI, and soon to be, MKM.
Then you were comparing the MiG-29, not between the MiG-29M and MiG-29K. Further more, the MiG-29K is a carrier aircraft, the MiG-29M is not, carrier aircraft have further structural differences that escalate costs, if you continue to claim similarities, post up some facts and stats.
futhermore integration of more weapons, including actual tests with live weapons does not mean the radar is not necessarily more advance, it means it’s proven! something different than assuming the capabilities of a radar that has not had the excessive testing or funding to test these weapons. I’m sure you heard of the term vaporware.
MIG-29M is more sophisticated aircraft than Su-30MK(Digital FBW versus Analog, Radar with full ground modes, composites etc). A proper comparision of MIG-29M technology is with the price of new Su-27SKM upgrade.
Also MIG-29 is in limited production unlike Flanker. MIG-29K costs upto $43M for In despite India is already a big operator MIG-29 for long period of time. So imagine MIG-29M costs for country which already does not have MIG-29.
A faulty comparison and analogy. The MiG-29M series initially had more modes supported than the basic Su-27, however time and money favored Flanker development. the Su-30MKK series has actually completed tests of various A2G ordinances, thanks to a large customer base and funding, something of which the MiG-29M cannot say.
furthermore, the Su-30MKI has digital fly by wire, read
http://www.flug-revue.rotor.com/FRheft/FRHeft04/FRH0411/FR0411d.htm
MiG-29 costs, MiG-29M, MiG-29SMT, and MiG-29K prices are different and you have to recognize it’s differences. Carrier-based aircraft tend to be more expensive than a dedicated land based aircraft, compare the prices of the MiG-29K deal and Yemens MiG-29SMT deal. India is a large user of the MiG-29.. just the MiG-29, not the M, K, or SMT which are considerably different
You would not be buying a PAK FA if you already have a JSF since both aircraft are supposed to be similar. My vote would be JSF plus F-15E or JSF plus Rafale.
PAK FA is supposed to be more of an F-22 class aircraft than a JSF. The estimated specs posted in the PAK-FA thread place it clearly within Flanker size.
I don’t think Thailand has officially chosen the Gripen.
although the Gripen is cute
I’d take the F-16, it could do the same roles, carry the weapons farther. and depending on my relation, I can get massive subsidies from the US for it’s purchase as well as the backing of a larger more powerful nation. Furthermore, parts for the F-16 are produced in many nations (i.e Turkey) and I have options of European, American and Israeli weapons to hang on it.
If i give picture of missiles hanging from an aircraft or lying in front of aircraft. It does not mean that missile is integrated to that aircraft or it is real missile. How can you prove it otherwise that it can fire what it can carry.
Every thing from top to bottom is fake.
By that kind of logic, you cannot prove it is a dummy or it is real, these are all assumptions.
However what we do know is that Russian dummys tend to be either red-orange in color and/or striped. If the weapon is lying down somewhere, a real one would have plastic covers over it.
I have to agree with Phantom here, too bad the F-18A-D is no longer produced.
F-18s sure look good with that aggressor camouflage too, I particularly like this one