It was probably a mistake to retire both MiG-27 and Su-17. I guess at the time it looked like single-engined aircraft were too vulnerable against MANPADS.

Single engine combat aircraft were retired to save money during Yeltsin government. And yes, it did leave a gap in capabilities, which was noticed already in Chechnya.

Thanks for the link MSphere, I will have a look at the new data.

Brainless repeating of the same old BS is getting tiresome… especially if it’s without a hinch of anything measurable.. cold numbers say the opposite.. I can’t say whether the F-16 gulps fuel faster than a MiG-29 or whether the F-34/JP-8 is so much more expensive than Jp54, but the fact is that, despite its two engines, the MiG-29 is still cheaper to fly..

Fuel is only a fraction of the flying cost. I would expect maintenance and spare parts to be more expensive (as in civil airlines).

The other day TASS interviewed Yuri Bely, General Director of the Research Institute of Instrumentation (NIIP) “VV Tikhomirov”. The journalist asked him about the Zaslon-AM, used in upgraded MiG-31BM. His answer was that the potential of this model had been exhausted.

http://tass.ru/opinions/interviews/3957569

A while ago there was talk of another improved MiG-31. Could this comment be related? I was wondering if Tikhomirov is working on another Zaslon variant.

Serbia to receive additional Mig-29 fighter jets and Buk missiles from Belarus

This caught me by surprise. I wonder if the entire fleet will be upgraded to the same standard. Russia and Belarus offer different modernization. According to Serbian sources, the work will be carried out in Serbia with the help of Russian technicians.

MiG-35 will be presented to the public tomorrow:

http://www.aex.ru/news/2017/1/26/165326/

The first MiG-29 variant did not fulfill Soviet requirements. These stated a range of 800 kms with internal fuel and 2.750 at high altitude with a drop tank. The first version (9.12) managed 700 and 2.100 respectively.

http://alejandro-8en.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/fuel-load-in-different-mig-29-variants.html

What I’m still rather curious about is why Egypt went with the MiG-29M? Since they already have F-16’s, some Flanker variant would have offered them better power projecting capabilities (they are purchasing those Mistrals after all). Did they get a very good deal on it or what?

Probably for political reasons (Israel). Now they have both Western and Russian suppliers.

Now the only export Flanker is the canard-ed, PESA-ed, TVC-ed Su-30MKI/MKA/SM and that is, price wise, a different beast (more expensive than Su-35S, actually, due to foreign content)

I am not so sure, as Su-30MKI derivatives have been produced in large numbers during many years, and some of the clients (Kazakhstan) buy them at Russian rates.

MIG is for sure in no shape to just keep producing airframes by the scores on MIG’s funds, and just hope a mediocre or small contract will fall from heaven.

At the moment is producing airframes for Egypt, and it is a very important contract. It seems that Russia will acquire more MiG-29Ks, India could follow the same path. I do not see the Fulcrum as a money pit, even if the 35 suffers from delays and VKS does not seem that interested. IMO the issue is that it is probably not that cheaper compared to Su-30 variants.