MSphere-

You already demonstrated the Bars was 200kg and 60mm (>13%) larger than Irbis. Nobody disputed Irbis E has more sensitive, newer technology, elements than Bars. And their designers figured out how to essentially run two power channels through it at the same time. Bravo. Welcome to F-15C circa 1990. You still need to feed the monster. So they upgraded the engines and their power units, too. Nothing comes free. They added much complexity and worked on the man-machine interface. Again, bravo. But the software to automate doesn’t write itself. Wake me up when Su-35S demonstrates attacking ground targets and air targets at the same time.

An enlarged fuel tank like on MiG-29SMT for extending range isn’t bad. MiG-35 is using the same highly touted technologies found on Su-35S. I’m not here to knock any of the three mentioned; MiG-35, Su-30SM, and Su-35S. It’s pretty obvious that Su-30SM is the most mature of the three. That cannot be disputed, because unlike the other two, it’s been operational substantially longer. And for all around utility, Su-30SM is currently the only proven model of the three. Technology flaws and all.

MSphere, you keep citing the manufacturer propaganda that the track record sucks.

So for fulfilling air defense, you have from those numbers 1.2 bil RUB per Su-35S and .94 bil RUB per MiG-35. Su-35S is pretty expensive as it sits in development. I bet it begins to approach Su-30SM price by the time they flesh out its potential. Not that A2G is truly something that a VKS-based unit needs, but for the fulfilling needs of regular Russian air force and naval military units you would want to expand its full envelope. Then again, maybe the Chinese will fund it.

Su-30SM has considerably larger radar than Su-35S. The Su-35S is an apples to oranges comparison. Su-35S has nicer engines and lighter airframe because it plays to a different niche.

I want to see MiG-35OVT take on the MiG-29SMT hunchback. You couldn’t probably justify Su-35S over such a monster as MiG-35SMT. Sure Su-35S is better because it’s bigger. But it’s about filling a niche with good enough. Su-35S is just a stepping stone for the T-50 program and has literally no strategic value.

Short answer, yes. But technically an insignificant capability. They already liked to ripple off a pair considering their low probabilities to hit. I’m pretty sure F-15A began life with capacity to target two independent targets with its illuminator within a design envelope. Early Flankers and, up until a decade ago, most Flanker exports shared this limitation.

Looks good from the side. Would probably resemble an SR-71 – blending the chine to the main wing – from above.

BTW – was thinking Su-34’s front gear would open/close ahead of the front scoops. That would make the front wheel bay unnecessary.

How does Su-47 fit into these arguments? Please start another thread if you want to debate MiG 14X.

I see people dismissed the notion of A-12 Avenger being a better share plan with the UK government. The A-12 probably would have actually finished development. Conservatively it had about a 5,000-pound payload for a 1500 km combat range. Typical of projects of its era, performance stats were very conservative. Not terrible, especially if it had received modernization like EODAS or MAWS, EOTS, DIRCM, AESA radar, etc. Plus it was actually designed to fire AMRAAM, even if only a pair. And it was every bit the stealth LGB dropper as F-117A. And it was a two-seater. No telling what kind of performance from a single-seater, but modernization probably eliminated need for a second man. The GE motors in the A-12 were supposed to be much larger front stages than the ones used on the F-117A, giving it about 3,000 pounds more thrust and better economy. The A-12 also had nearly double the wing area of the F-117A. The F-117A had a better penetration velocity and maximum ceiling, but it also had higher takeoff and landing speeds to match. The MTOW of A-12 was approximately 33% heavier than F-117A. The A-12 was an A-6E replacement, much more ambitious than the F-117A. More than likely A-12 would have been something special by the time it went into production. But we’ll never know because Rumsfeld was dead-set on Super Hornet and cancelled everything even remotely in competition with it.

But USAF continued to fund targeted maintenance enhancements in the 1990s and the RAM strip and re-coat program was one. The strip and re-coat program reduced total maintenance man hours per flight hour from 50+ to less than 8, similar to F-15 and less than F-111.

This 8 hours number is pretty dubious, because AFAIK the F-15 in any version has never been sub-double digits man hours per flight hours.