There is no RuAF RD-33MK and other RD-33MK.. There is only the RD-33MK..

That is your opinion not fact. I have seen some flights and it give good impression that they will outperform export fighters.

Nonsense.. Until recently, Russians have been exporting far more advanced stuff than they were buying for themselves.. Only in recent years they have caught up (Su-30SM, Su-35S and Su-34). Of course, they are specific things which are Russian-only, mostly related to IFF.. and nuclear weapon delivery, of course..

There are no reasons to believe that Russian MiG-29KR/KUBR are more advanced than Indian MiG-29K/KUB.. or that Su-30SM is significantly more advanced than Su-30MKA (apart from some new radar modes on the Bars-R).

until recently?. Did you missed Ruaf statements regarding Su-27SM more than 10 years ago that domestic Flankers are more advanced than export. that is very strict policy. and it is being proven with time as India never had the readiness rate of Flankers what Ruaf achieved in Syria.

http://forum.keypublishing.com/archive/index.php/t-20107.html
Let’s return to the start of our conversation. Which new aircraft nevertheless will military aviation receive?

– Above all, it is the Su-27SM. I am convinced, this airplane has imbibed in it all the very newest and best that we have put into various Sukhoy modifications, including into those which Russian is exporting successfully, the Su-30MKK and the Su-30MKI. The distinguishing features of the upgraded aircraft are: the capability for use of armament both “against the air” and “against the ground.” New avionics (the five Su-27SM from the Far East reached Lipetsk toeing the line!) And at the same time, I will note, the price of the airplane’s upgrade absolutely is incommensurable with the price of a new airplane. This is an aircraft very close to the fifth generation. In the end, it fails in two details: the airplane still is too noticeable on radar and for the time is unequal in armament to the fifth generation. However, I am certain that the Su-27SM will not be inferior to one series-built foreign airplane

The MiG-35 definitely won’t outperform the MiG-29OVT. Quite on the contrary, it’s heavier (carrierborne mods, no more lithium, AESA radar), draggier (twin canopy) and without KLIVT TVC-nozzles.

that is neutralized by stronger engines and lack of weight of TVC and bigger wings give much more agility.

Sure because Mig-35 use Russian magic physics while others aircrafts have to obey normal physics

they are the leaders in aerodynamics and material tech. just looe at SukhoiSuperjet without composits and still wider than other regional jets.

So what is combat radius of Su-27SM vs Su-35S then , troll ?

earlier specification of Su-27SM. I am sure those specifications will get improved with more lighter systems.

http://www.flankers-site.co.uk/mos2005_day02.html

Which is absolutely nothing

still more than you.

All currently produced 3rd generation Fulcrums are powered by the same RD-33MKs engines which produce 9000kG of thrust (700 more than original RD-33). There are some proposals by Klimov for further improved RD-33MKR with 9500kG, but there are no details and it is rather long term perspective. It seems there is no high interest in it, nor in the thrust-vectored version. MiG-29OVT was just a technology demonstrator refurbished from the “154” MiG-29M. During the last decade nobody was interested in exploring this direction of development, even the demonstrators for MMRCA program did not have thrust vectoring. Looking at its relatively low interes,t it is rather improbable that RuAF will be eager to finance the engine development and necessary flight tests and will probably stick to RD-33MK as well.

That is exported figures. no relationship with Ruaf MIG35

Do you have any links? It interesting that they are visiting MiG-35 construction despite the fact that nobody ordered it. Also, can you name about which specific airframes are we talking?

you should not be in MIG35 discussion if you don’t know who and why People are visiting MIG35 factory.

There are exactly two airframes of MiG-35 (or MiG-29M, it is the sam aircraft 9.41S): “741” and “747” which are flying since respectively 3.02.2012 and 24.12.2011. The third airframe (MMRCA testbed) was a refurbished (again) “154” MiG-29M from 1990 and does not represent current production standard. It is obvious that the software is ready as it is almost the same airframe as 9.41, just without naval modifications.

All MIG29K airframes are MIG35 airframes. It is built on that experience. what is the primary air to surface weopon for MIG35 testing?.

here is the link Rogozin visiting MIG35 construction. He also visited syria recently and he has instruction to take syria operations taken into account.
http://www.migavia.ru/index.php/ru/novosti/novosti-korporatsii/665-dmitrij-rogozin-osmotrel-proizvodstvo-novejshego-aviatsionnogo-kompleksa-mig-35

As usual another nonsense statement with no stats to back up

you need statistics for things you cant practically observe. just watch videos of MIG-29OVT. there is no need to go into statistics.

Yet, iam sure, you would be the first one to call BS if US producers talk good about their products

its about credibility of governmental and industrial system. MIG-35 construction is visited by high officials like Rogozin with reminders. Russian producers cant sell a BS product to Ruaf that does not perform.
than compare it with Obama who does not know anything and highly doubt any accountability.

http://www.vanguardngr.com/2014/02/obama-us-spend-50-billion-olympics/
WASHINGTON (AFP) – President Barack Obama said that the United States would not need to match the huge $50 billion shelled out by Russia if it wanted to host another Olympic Games

So is domestic F-35/16/15/18 produce more thrust than export version? or only products from mother Russia have that magical capability?

Pay attention there is difference. how many foreign pilots have flown PAKFA compare to F-35. how much percentage of PAKFA imported.

Did i said you can carry more fuel without bigger fuel tank? no.

you said more fuel means more range. which i disapproved by Su-27SM and Su-35 comparision.

If you are so dumb to the point that you cant download the picture and look at them then nothing i can help TBH

there is no such picture that show MIG-29M has larger spine than MIG-29SMT.

Nice try but the prototype of Mig-35 was refurbished airframe of MiG-29M .Future standard will have 4 m2 bigger wing area, however at current stage Mig-35 still a paper plane.
And it not everyone schooling me , it is lolek who has information regarding Mig-35, the rest (especially you ) dont know exact detail

there are several airframes called MIG-35. and the new 2 are in construction that will fly in near future. the software is advanced enough to predict the flying qualities of MIG-35 from MIG-29K.

Sure because products made by Russian are not affected by factors like physics?

yup its Russian physics. unmatched in several critical fields. Aerodynamics/titanium/alloys are core strengths.

I dont think so , every single things i said i have charts or calculation to back myself up. On the other hand, you have provided nothing others than your own assumption

Your charts are irrelevant as its referring to diffeent planes. I clearly provide statements from official source from both airforce and MIG official

Irrelevance, different design , different aerodynamic

I am glad that you admit that only MIG29 design can increase range with increasw fuel capacity. Does this statement look stupid.

Yes , all extra fuel will be loaded there. It basically a Mig-29 SMT with even bigger spine for fuel

bigger spine than SMT?. Did you look at pics side by side.

Just like Mig-35 will not carry more fuel if its spine is removed

sure.

Irrelevance regarding aerodynamic quality. Pylon can be strengthen , and no , it is not redesign from ground up. More weight with same wing area will reduce your max altitude and ITR

same wing area?

Irrelevance , TVC been tested on Mig-29 airframe before. And once again , you have not provide any data to show that Mig-35 has better ITR or altitude than Mig-29

TVC tested on MIG29? do you know what you writing. That MIG29OVT from late 90s have no relationship structurally with current MIG35 which is based on MIG29K. That MIG29OVT use Rd33 series 3 engines not the RD33MK . NoT same fuel capacity or FBW or wing area or cockpit nose design. From me statements from official are enough to believe on it about all around aerodynamic superiority of MIG35 over MIG29. They are far more credible than someone who is uninformed and post irrelevant pics.