star49no, they are part of China that Russia took over. Alot of the asian tribes that live there had to flee to the Chinese side of the border.
when did they part of China? Even old times before nations states boundries were defined by tribes. but it does not mean Tribes own that land. they just managed to live there before any other power. and Soviet Union should have anexed Mongolia as part of Russia. Just small population and rest of world has suffered because of Mongols in the past. Simlarly 70% of Kazakistan and whole of Eastern Ukraine also belongs to Russia becaues of ethinic, scientific, economic reasons.
It was Russia that played Great Game with British empire in 19th century. and empire stretched from Easter Europen like Poland/Finland to Pacific coast in one homoenous structures unlike small islands of British.
China was a small kingdom at that point. For making claim on another terroitory there should be reason like language, Ethinicities, Scientific base, Economic dependency. like USA can make a claim on Taiwan. because Most of Tawianese speak english, using US scientific base for modernization (which is again built by Russian immigrants and other Eastern Europeans).
Under Yeltsin, Russo-Chinese relations were very warm.. but under Putin, he says one thing but does another.
Putin is alot clever than Yelstin. He is making a Global alliance of natural resource countries for raising the price which directly contridicts with natural resource consuming countries.
star49It did. Ask the German’s who flew their MiG-29’s against it.
so post the report from any open source that Gripen has decisive aerodynamic advantage over even MIG-29A. there is no generational aerodynamic difference that u seems to imply even with older MIG-29A engines and FBW.
JSF/F-22 and other 5th generations fighters has aerodynamic advantage because u load them with 6 to 8 AAMs or PGMs it does not increase there RCS nor increase there aerodynamic drag due to hanging of outside weopons. and they have massive internal fuel capacities. Not depended on external tanks like Gripen/EF/Rafale/J-10.
Theoretically if u load Gripen with 6 AAMs and 1 External fuel tank vs 10 AAM and much larger external fuel tank for MIG-35. that u will hardly notice aerodynamic difference. and this things further becomes irrelevant when u prepare for Strike missions with heavy cruise missiles/Antiship missiles and larger ET. so even F-18E becomes aerodynamically competent.
I can give another example of generational difference and that is MIG-31 because it can sustain Mach 2.4 with full weopons upto 800KM at 60000 feet and that is figure for 30 years old aircraft not current upgrades with lighter avionics and upgraded engine. Gripen/EF/Rafale operationally cannot operate at those heights , range and speeds which give tremendous range to BVR weopons thats why MIG-31 is rival to 5th generations planes but others are not.
star49The MiG-29 is certainly a great design, but it’s still a generation older than the Gripen. Even if you put new systems into it, it’s infrastructure and aerodynamic design is still not up to par with the newer generation which includes the Gripen, Rafale, Eurofighter and F-22.
Generation older? than Why did JAS-39A didnot outperform MIG-29A decisively
in exercise.
MIG-35 order today will have more powerull engines with longer life, more fuel for afterburner, advance quadigi FBW control TVC, new material construction, IRST against low RCS targets, AESA radar, full glass cockpit with HOTAS, All this things contribute more than Canards for generational difference.
Stealth with interanal weopons is different thing like F-22 that is generational difference.
star49Like the Lavi-TDI or the first Rafales for demonstration flights.
That MIG-35 had fully functional radar. phazotron guranteed alteast 600~900 hrs MTBO with 680 T/R modules. Plan is for 1100 T/R modules.
star49MIG-29K atleast has larger wing so better space for carrying PGMs, better range, TWR, larger nose, RCS reduction, fibre optics. and this specifications were frozen in 2002. A second MIG-29K order will be right comparision.
star49I cant remember exactly about climbing, but the data I read suggested the F-16 outaccelerates the MiG-29. But I think the F-16 climbed at least as fast, because all comparisons were won by the F-16 or too close to call…
Again. F-16 engines were superior to MIG-29 untill Series 3/MK engines for MIG-29. If F-16 was losing 30% of thrust just imagine how much is actual thrust loss of MIG-29 with short life engine and different maintaince. F-16 is not in the same class. It is more comparable to F-15C. as mentioned by Egyptian. and they are upgrading it further. No future for canards.
http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2007/05/01/213591/military-engines-russia.html
The current production-standard RD-33MK selected for Indian navy MiG-29K/KUBs develops 20,000lb of thrust and has a 1,000h TBO. The engine has a wider-chord fan for 6% greater airflow, full-authority digital control, a new “multi-section” no-smoke combustor and three-dimensional aerodynamics in the turbine. In 2006, RSK MiG’s Chernyshev plant assembled four RD-33MKs to support flight testing of the first twin-seat MiG-29KUB, which made its maiden flight in January.Another application for the RD-33MK powerplant is the MiG-35 that MiG plans to offer for India’s multi-role combat aircraft requirement. A further option is the RD-33MKV (for vectoring), which has the same thrust rating, but which is fitted with a Klimov swivelling nozzle. This is currently being tested on a MiG-29OVT technology demonstrator.
In April last year Klimov announced that it had begun design of a new engine for the LFI next-generation lightweight fighter being developed by MiG. Although MiG has yet to define all of its requirements for the engine, Klimov has said it will be an upgrade of the RD-33 with 25,300lb thrust, vectoring nozzle and modular design
star49EF has better acceleration than F-16. F-16 has better acceleration than the MiG-29.
The F-16 is superior to the MiG-29 in most areas incl. rate of climb and turn rates or at least about equal. The EF on the other hand is known to beat the F-16 in every way.
Those nice big LERX on the MiG-29 not only produce lift, but add some drag too, which is the reason why the Viper with less or about the same TWR out accelerates the MiG.About the TVC: TVC is most effective at low speeds (airshow manouvers like) or at high/supersonic speeds. At typical fighting speeds, the gain from TVC often does not justify the penalties.
U have serious problem in making comparisions. u compare different time periods and Prices. U wont even know F-16E/MIG-35 performance
Imgine US/Russia abondon there 5th generation programs. and order 620 new F-16/MIG-29. and load them with the most advance 5th generation engines, light weight nano-composites(which only they can make) and 3D TVC. I am not going into light weight avionics and advance computer design modelling which was not available in 70s. there per unit price will still be cheaper than EF and will blow it away in Physical performance.
EU didnot have that high end Military aviation and Space industry.
First u have to settle Engine and Construction material issue before u can compare Physical performance. and Compare same time periods, Prices and Not export oriented down graded. Like u cannot compare German EF with hypothetical IAF MIG-35 in 2007.(because there are still certain things that are not exportable).
star49Many countries have offset agreements. Simply extra incentives to sign the contract. You buy some of my product, I will do some investment in your country.
extra incentive? it is three times the value of contract. It is forced investment on customer choice.
here is Russian model of arms sales. these countries are getting alot of cash due to rising prices of natural resources. and u can sell the old aircraft as new. so no expenditure involved in manufacturing.
http://www.mosnews.com/money/2004/10/22/sudanarms.shtml
Russian officials and industry sources said Sudan has become a leading importer of Russian weapons in Africa and an example of Moscow’s new policy to finance arms sales. They said Sudan has procured MiG-29 fighter-jets, Mi-24 attack helicopters and a range of weapons and munitions.“Since 2002, there have been positive changes in military-technical cooperation between Russia and the African states,” the state-owned Russian arms export agency Rosoboronexport said. “There has been a noticeable activation in relationship between Russia and its traditional partners —- Angola, Ethiopia, Sudan, Cameroon, Republic of Congo, Nigeria and Uganda.”
The main MiG assembly plant at Lukhovtsy, south of Moscow, had some 200 MiG-29 fighters on hand when the Soviet Union collapsed in 1991, most of them ready to ship. MiG is still in the process of selling off this Soviet hardware to nations like Algeria, Yemen and Sudan
In 1998 Ananyev, then chief of state-owned arms-trade monopoly Rosvooruzheniye, told me that at the Lukhovtsy facility Soviet-made MiG-29s were dismantled and then reassembled under the supervision of foreign customers’ representatives and sold as new.
star49doesn’t look like giveaways to me.
what is this $9B? basically giving $3.5B for getting $9B of investment. and sale is still FMS not commercial.
The major element in this deal was an offset agreement between Lockheed-Martin and the Polish government, which sees an amount of up to $9 billion return in the Polish economy. Major projects include plans by General Motors to expand a plant in Gliwice, Poland, and a pledge by Motorola to invest in a state-of-the-art communication system for Polish public services
star49The engine is certified for 1500 to 2000 hours MTBO. That’s double the AL-31F.
another speculation? certified 1500 MTBO. even western engines will be hard to get it. U cannot built a decent engine for trainer and simple tansport aircraft let alone
It does not matter, they’re still buying F-16s. They are not buying MiG-29s.
so who are giving them free MIG-29? they have no choice. If they want EU subsidies theywill have to play by there rules.
Lol, because they have no choice. France has already disbanded the M2K production line and wants India to buy Rafales. With no choice left, India had to upgrade their MiG-29s, but that wasn’t their original and favored choice, which is to acquire more of the Mirage 2000s. Russia tried every bait to make India buy more MiG-29s other than the limited allotment of MiG-29Ks, and I guess literally tied in exchange to Pakistan’s RD-93 acquisition.
IAF got M2K in early 80s and M2K line was disbaned in 2005. so they couldnot figure out in 20 years? ur logic does not make sense. why they dont upgrade M2K before upgrading MIG-21s? MIG-29K is tied to carrier and separate thing.
These are all first hand. As for Warsaw Pact countries, they’re still buying F-16s like the Poles, and Gripens like the Czechs and Hungarians. Others are not looking at MiG-29 upgrades either.
MIG-29 upgrade cost money. It depends where the economic dependencies of countries are. It is not free transaction. I think Serbia is doing it so is CIS republics who have Oil money.
I gave you the above. Now tell me which Warsaw Pact country is buying new MiG-29s?
ur confusing buying with basically free give aways.
star49Must be complete nonsense. There is no 4000 hour life engien for the Flanker and Fulcrum. And in the IAF, the MiG-29 does not beat the M2K, which was the original front runner, and the plane the MRCA specification was originally concieved for.
u should read before u post. RD-33MK for MIG-29K is 4000hrs and similar is 117S for Su-35. This is from factory link. look at pictures of MIG-29OVT.
http://www.avia500.ru/ru/produce/motor/rd-33mk.
I am referring to air to air exercises not the MRCA contest. If M2K was so good they would have signed up for it just like Su-30MKI when money was delivered for paper project. M2K has limited engine growth and structural capability. IAF looking for aircraft for next 40 years not something already obsolete. Egyptians also has both M2K and F-16 but they consider older MIG-29 above them.
Maybe one should ask the RMAF. In their own exercises, their Fulcrums try to stay away from a close turn in dogfight against Hornets because they know which plane can turn tighter.
these are still old Fulrums with Series 2 engines and no advance FBW capability. Series 3 engines with FADEC started with SMT program.
star49However STAR49 i would say probably China in 2007 has good quality standards because they have mixed the high standards of Japan, Europe the US and even Russia with their high productivity, i guess the J-10 must be a quit demanding aircraft and sloppy manufacturing must be out of the question
It depends where J-10 is manufactured. u have to consider that Public sector wages in China is considerably lower what is in private sector of West or relative to Public sector of Russia. There is little u can do with public sector. thats why i always have doubts about innovation in Chinese government run entities. Russia has still left over intellectual power in Government sector.
star49Unsubstantiated claim based on opinionated prejudice only makes you a fool.
No wonder everyone tries to ignore you…
So show me a single high tech product developed and made with China own intellectual property in Communist times before 1978 that is comparable to what is atleast consider acceptable to western standards.
star49Yet it looks like the engine has double the life of AL-31F.
Looks double life? how can looks certify double life
Pretty much much of the former Warsaw Pact.
Buying means arms length transaction.
Sorry, but M2KC can still be used as a fighter and MiG-29 as a bomb truck. The Indians use M2KC in air to air in exercises and MiG-29 has provisions for rocket pods and bombs. All you have to do is check the Indian records for the M2K mission availability and generation rates compared to MiG-29s.
Mission availability depends on spares and support and which was breakup after initially after Soviet collapse. M2K has more crashes than MIG-29 when consider the overall numbers. Any way they are upgrading MIG-29 with sign contract for engine and avionics. and they are still dithering with M2K upgrade contract.
Lol. The Poles bought their F-16s. Who would be stupid to give it them? These are brand new Block 52 plus.
so all those Israeli/Egyptian/Turk/Sk F-16s in 80s-90s that were bought were second hand? Warsaw pact countries even dont have that much money for defence. very little is left after salaries.
You are the one who makes me LAUGH. You are so in la la land you must be living in a different dimension.
How many former Warsaw Pact countries are buying MiG-29 updates or new MiG-29s? How many of them are moving into Gripens or F-16s? How many F-16 users are moving to MiG-29?
Give me example of Buying in Warsaw pact countries. Not those offsets/Lease agreements.
star49For the last time, no operator will let its aircrafts engines being worn out until such thrust looses occur. It is simply not applicable and doesn’t fit any operational sense, nor any safety rules. You refer the engines performance directly to its life time, but that is complete BS. If you go that way the EJ200 is designed for 6000 and must be therefore significantly better than any AL-31F or RD-33 according your logic. It’s simply BS and I won’t comment any further on such stupid things.
there is big difference between 400hrs and 4000hr as compared to 4000hr and 6000hrs. u can see for real world examples when 10% reduction in thrust resulted in 400hr increase in life. Similar is F-16 case from Lockheed. Flanker/Flcrums aerodynamics are so good that 4000hrs engine is fine for them. it is the same old engine with which IAF MIG-29 beat M2K.
You’re insane aren’t you? Your dancing around facts and coming up with completly irrelevant statements regarding political systems is nothing more than a pure vast of time.
Political system directly effects quality of manufacturing process and hence end product life time performance. just look at China as another example.
I won’t comment any more on this you are either ignorant, naive or entirly stupid.
The discussion with you ends here right now. I’m sick of the crap you post.
Its good that end here. U dont have any information to contribute.
Sign In
