AFAIK they spoke about a south african MAWS or so. Feel free to correct me on that.

I haven’t heard of any such problems in the Indian Flankers. May be because we use different subsystems ??? like an Indian RWR.

AFAIK that’s right. Indian Su-30MKI use the indian made Tarang Mk2 RWR. Other Su-30MK models use russian made systems. I suppose SPO-32/L-150 Pastel, but there is little info about that.

Thanks MM11 for the image , looks awesome

Couple of questions

1 ) The model shown is the real MMRCA deal for Mig-35 or its just some interesting model ?

2 ) If its a real stuff , did they actually started building prototypes for it ? Any specs for this Model Mig-35 available ?

3 ) What advantage will a cranked Wings will have on aerodynamic performance over the conventional wing that we have seen on Mig-35 yet ?

Thanks

Well the MiG-35 is specifically designed for the MMRCA competition, as the IAF deemed the originally offered MiG-29M1/2 as inadequate. If you actually look at the INs MiG-29K you will notice that their inner flaperons are much larger to reduce approach speeds and improve takeoff performance. For the land based MiG-29M/35 the inner flaperons are smaller, that is the reason for the crank, it has no impact on the aerodynamics at all as far as I know. A representive prototype of the MiG-35 is now under construction and is supposed to fly in the not to distant future (some when this year).

uss novice , Can you put up the image if Maks 07 of Mig-35 with cranked wing and 11 hp.

Ok this might sound over ambitious , but since we know that there exist some supercruise capability for the Su-35 ( not sure with useful payload though as it is in the initial stage of testing ) , can the Mig-35 supercruise with a RD-33MK ?

Supercruise is more than unlikely for the MiG-35 with the RD-33MK. Wingspan is increased and thrust can just roughly compensate for the increased weight. In case of the Su-35 thrust has been significantly increased.
BTW here are the images. Note the new fins as well.

Flex, I’m not so sure. I thought the one shown to Austria was the 9.15 variety, No 154 if i’m not mistaken. Check out G. Mader’s article at ACIG. There was also a poster around 2002 who had posted the MiG-29M’s brochure for the swiss competition. IIRC, mtow was 23500, payload ~ 5500.

I’ll see if I can dig up the dirt.

USS.

No problem, buddy.. Looked it up for ya. It was 9.17, after all.. 🙂
No.917 at Zeltweg in June 2000, photographed by Georg Mader.

http://www.airliners.net/photo/Russia—Air/Mikoyan-Gurevich-MiG-29SMT-(9-17)/0141233/L/

You are both right. RAC MiG initially proposed the MiG-29SMT to Austria, but Austria didn’t granted participation in the competition. In 2002 when Eurofighter was already selected, the flood catastrophe caused delays and many manufacturers tried their luck again. RAC MiG offered the new MiG-29M1/M2 now. The MiG-29M2 demonstrated is the former 4th MiG-29M prototype and now the aircraft which is called MiG-35, though it’s nothing else than a testbed, not a representive prototype.

BTW I looked up in my materials and found the content of the austrian website. It’s in german.

Leistungsdaten MiG-29M Einsitzer MiG-29M2 Zweisitzer
Abfluggewicht normal 16.500kg 16.600kg
Abfluggewicht mit 5.000kg Treibstoff und 5.000kg Bewaffnung 21.500kg 21.500kg
Belastungsgrenze von Aufhängungen, Zelle und Fahrwerk 23.500kg 23.500kg
maximale Waffenlast an 9* Aufhängungen *mit Tandemträger bis zu 13 Aufhängungen 5.500kg 5.500kg
maximale Treibstoffzuladung intern 5.000kg 4.700kg
maximale Treibstoffzuladung mit Zusatztanks 9.300kg 9.000kg
Triebwerke 2 x RD-33 Ser.IIIMmit je 85.1kN
max. Fluggeschwindigkeit auf 200m 1.500km/h od. Mach 1,24
max. Fluggeschwindigkeit auf 15.500m 2.200km/h od. Mach 2,08
max. Flughöhe 17.500m 17.000m
max. Lastvielfaches 9g
operationelle Reichweite, 12.500m, Mach 0,8, interner Treibstoff 2.000km 1.800km
operationelle Reichweite, 12.500m, Mach 0,8, 3 Zusatztanks >3.000km
operationelle Reichweite, 12.500m, Mach 0,8, 3 Zusatztanks, 1 Luftbetankung >5.500km
max. Steigleistung 290m/s 280m/s
Startstrecke 550m
Landestrecke mit Bremsfallschirm 800m

MM11, the above are present in Tejas and Su-30 MKI also, which albeit slightly dated, will not give them an assailable disadvantage.

Please note that Tejas’ composite layout software is used by “best in the business” i.e. A380 of Airbus. It has an advanced HMDS co-developed with Israel. Although it’s FCS is not based on multiple programming languages and multiple h/w (though I am unaware of advantages, if any), as per IAF test pilots, it is “a joy to fly” and handles very well.

Sensor fusion shall be present from Mk.2 version onwards. As far as engine is concerned, it is unrelated to the MRCA tender, as a separate tender will be passed for Mk.2 engine and another one for the co-operation on Kaveri engine.

As far as EWS is concerned, Su-30 MKI will be equipped with SIVA EW pod. It is likely that Tejas will also be equipped with it as well, along with Litening target pod that is already present. I am unaware what DVI stands for.

References :-

Posts from Bharat Rakshak forum, by rakall.

A system being present in two platforms, doesn’t mean it’s the same and that no technology can be obtained.