star49STAR do you know anything about the following things –
1) When will this new airframe fly?
2) Expected range of the Mig-35 on internal fuel only??
3) Maximum weapons carriage (in KG) ?
u can simply judge this from MIG-29K. that one has 2000KM range with internal fuel, 5500KG weopon load and more than 24 tons take off weight. so MIG-35 is lighter, better engines so range and payload should be more. i havent seen range of EF/Rafale on internal fuel
star49That is immaterial and and chrom put forward most likely not completely true. The USAF has made a descision to sell the F-22A to friends , does this mean they have something better for themselves ( just an example) . Russia is a very good friend of india and hopefully they would offer them the best they have ( and not something that is inferior to the best they have) . The cold war is over and US and russia are freinds and allies and both face different security challenges therefore their hardware might be differently designed for different needs.
offcourse there would be better Radar, missiles for F-22 for USAF compared to any of its allies otherwise they wouldnt allow its export. but they will not say this openly.
It uses a PESA ( the bars – 29 is also a PESA) and its EW and targetting suite is amongst the best in the buisness ( According to USN guys ) .
they may not have clue to what best russia can produce.
The mig-29 has upgraded everthing with the Mig-35 so does this mean that its avionics etc are superior to the F-22 who’s avionics are also a decade or so old???
F-22 started with AESA and has i think fibreoptics.
Rafale started with PESA but still it is a PESA. i think they are slow in upgrading it.
Another point according to this brochure of the Bars-29 its detection range for 5m^2 target is between 100-120 Km which is not that great when you compare it to the range of US AESA’s such as APG-79 and APG-80 both of which are operational .
i think brochures are not that usefull reference. the new Phased array OSA from same manufacturer is claimed to have range of 160KM and its for UBT and other smaller nose.
star49Bars-29 is not AESA it is just a scaled down Bars and it does not seem to have Mig support. The Phazotron MFE (PESA) on the other hand has been test flown on a Mig-29. The only AESA radar on the horizon is the Zhuk-A which has yet to be built or flown or though at least one source says that they want it flying by the end of next year (I have heard a rumour that it may even be this year- but i am very sceptical at the moment). A mock-up was displayed at the last Maks I believe but there are no pictures in the public domain.
The upgraded Mig-29M is not the Mig-35, the 35 is to have some internal structural improvements to give it a 6000hour flight life.
MIG-29M is the MIG-29OVT. And MIG-35 is further upgrade of MIG-29M because that one has structural improvement and has AESA. and AESA time line does not depend on MIG. It depends on customer time line. if they want it quickly they can accelearte it.
http://www.rusarm.ru/p_frame/main.htm
Guests and exhibitors at the show can admire breathtaking aerobatics performed by a unique super-manoeuvrable MiG-29M multi-role fighter with thrust vector control (MiG-29OVT) in the skies over the London suburb.
star4920 F-22’s wont be enough for them . Ofcourse even a nation like venezuela or singapore can afford 1 raptor or 10 raptors however it is far far less then what the need !! If RAAF need 100+ new fighters and the competing fighters are the Raptor and rafale then obviously they would choose the rafale ( as they cannot afford 100 F-22’s ) so even in SOC’s context is the rafale superior to the raptor ???
so 20 long range F-22 with longer range air to air weopons will not be enough for RAAF but 100 short range, slow speed Rafale which will take more pilots, more ground crew will do the job? thats why it was so easy for RMAF to chose Flanker over F-18E when u buy small quantities u chose the best.
star49The eurofighter is export ready and has been exported allready in its entirity ( no different export or home version there are basic tranch versions and theire are no restrictions on what the customer wants ) – It has nothing like the RuAF which has 2 versions – one for home and another for export. The F-18E/F is being offered in its entirity to who so ever wants it ( has been in the market for a no. of years both with the Apg-79 and without it – both versions are operational)
these F-18E and EF has been marketed for almost decade now but what is there export success? and all of them look underdeveloped to me because if u sign up for them it takes 4 or 5 years to get first one.
That is because of the fact that RAF doesnt operate the newer versions because they eventually want to get the meteor in ( and therefore arent interested in getting the newest standard of AMRAAM) the AIm-120 available to them isnt downgraded but just not up to date to the newer C5 and C7 standards. The Aim-120C is also being offered to pakistan (although not the c7) .RAF was offered a version of the AMRAAM which was far far superior to that being operated by the USAF/USN which they declined in favour of their home grown Meteor.
KS-172 has been offered to India and now R-33E is cleared for export. It means Ruaf has something better for itself.
Only the meteor is for the future Everything else is now and has been there for quite some time . To claim that as a program the Mig-35 is even half as mature as the EF , rafale or gripen is absurd .
so u can consider rafale with its single short range exocet as an operational fighter? and i think Rafale avionics are now almost 1 decade old. it needs upgradation. the program is slow.
star49Becouse the designation of the aircraft with the TVC is Mig-29OVT, NOT Mig-29M.
I also notice that you completely ignored my point about the BS that article is spewing about systems fit, is that your way of trying not to look stupid becouse if it is it has failed. That article is BS, it has the wrong designation for the aircraft itself and fails to give any specifics on systems fit so do not bother posting it again. :p
Its MIG-29M with TVC is called MIG-29OVT (not ordinary MIG-29 which dont have digital FBW). which later changed to MIG-35 due to AESA.
this is from dubai airshow
Armada International 30.2 (April-May 2006)
In total contrast, RAC MiG staged a press conference to announce that the next MiG-29, hitherto known as the MiG-29OVT, will be known as the MiG-35. The new designation is mainly warranted by the fact that the airframe is much lighter and that the aircraft has thrust-vectoring engines, and a new active phased array radar.
The MiG-29 was present at Dubai in the form of the MiG-29 demonstrator aircraft which precisely features thrust vectoring controls, to show the evolution of this strictly fighter aircraft into a multiple-role platform for ground and naval attack. Tipping the scales at a hefty 22.3 tonnes the MST has a combat payload of five tonnes and a reinforced airframe to cope with the additional stress. It also features a Zhuk-ME radar (multiple-mode of course), liquid crystal displays and active jamming systems, and, most interestingly, an open architecture computer suite to enable the aircraft to operate on Western avionics and systems
star49And the EF typhoon , Super Hornet flying at farnboroughs were also not REAL THINGS ?? And what about Rafale at Le bourget last year was it also not real??
so Rafale/EF/F-18 has all capabilities fully developed and are they export standards or domestic like Ruaf aircraft versus export oriented.
typhoon doesnt have its own BVR?? It has a radar which cues its BVR missile which is currently the Aim-120C (soon to be Meteor in about 5 years time) . The rafale has the MICA-RF and MICA-IR and will also soon have meteor , the gripen is in the same situation. What is the new combat radius planned for the Mig-35 on internal fuel? The EF isnt a anti ship aircraft and most of the A2g capability is slowly comming on board . The rafale has significant a2g and anti ship capability and so does the gripen so they are all valid options. THE RAFALES PESA has LPI features and an AESA should be ready by 2010 .
Another thing about the Mig-35 – Has the mig gone about integrating all those new components on the new aircraft or they will begin to do so when they get the order ? How much as the new radar flown in tests aboard testbed and actual aircraft? How about EW suite has it yet been integrated into an older Mig-29 or do they start to do so when the buyer gives them the cash?
every thing u mentioned is for future. Typhoon have down graded export version of AIM-120. if IAF does not favour MICA equipped M2K-5 vs SU-30K and Brazil almost selected old version of Su-35 over M2K5-II. it does not give much confidence on MICA.
star49Again whats the logic in that ?? They cant afford F-22 Period !! Not many can (if any at all ) other then the rich USAF ( and even they can afford only 186 or so (maybe we’ll see a few more but so far it remains at 186) ) . Australia wants a strike capability as well in its fighter which the F-22 doesnt have to the extent to which they want therefore if they hypothetically buy some F-22’s they would need to again buy strike aircraft to fill in the requirment for Strike missions – a combo they cannot afford – simple as that!!
just like RMAF can afford 18 SU-30 or F-18 the same way RAAF can afford 20 F-22 thats the context SOC post. they many not afford 100 F-22. personally i have doubt about F-35 price.
star49Most modern radars and weapons have the capability to distinguish between clutter etc to be able to finepoint a A2a weapon launched against it ( the aim-120D along with modern radars offers the capability to go against cruise missiles for example because it can thoroughly communicate with its 2-way DL) however to be able to do so at a regular basis is something that is up in the air. The Reaction time between detection of a A2a missile ( fired from a distance of around 35-40nm at speeds reaching up to mach 3+ ) and to chart a succesfull intercept is very very minimal ( just a few seconds and the pilot really has to know where to look )
are ur sure about few seconds. mach 3+ is 1 Km per second. so it is around 70 seconds if u fire from 35 or 40 nm and that not includes lauch time and intial acceleration time.
star49Good luck doing that specially now that all Aim-120C’s , Mica-RF’s and R-77’s are RAM treated.
every one can claim anything unless it is independently confirm. how can Tor-M engage PGMs. if it can do it surely air to air fighter can to it much better.
It isnt about detecting or not detecting , It is about a detection advantage – The F-15’s equiped with AESA werent able to spot the raptor before the raptor had multiple AMRAAM’s launched at them however there would be point at which every radar detects you (even with low RCS) . So if My sensor can see you at 80nm whilest your sensor can only see me at 15-20nm or so who has the advantage??? And integrating stealth on airframes is a non-issue for LMA . they have actually bettered the requirment and provided favourable RCS to the F-22A and the USAF,USN USMC And 11 foreign customers (9+2) are putting full faith in it .The USAF/USN/USMC isnt stupid to put close to 250 billion dollars into a technolgy that will be redundant by the time it hits the IOC mark , they have seen how it happens in the past (F-22 program) and have established requirments for a Multi role Strike aircraft which will be effective for the entire generation of its lifespan.
F-22 wasnt suppose to be that expensive and it took another extra decade to field compare to mid nighties or so operational requirement. things change with time. and it does not matter how far u see when ur missile does work on opponent so u have to go into close in combat with cannon.
star49Funny how their own defence cheif said that they cant afford to buy the F-22A
when export F-35 is promised so cheaply to them so how can they afford export F-22.
star49That article can not even get the designation of the aircraft right, it calls it the Mig-29M despite reffering to TVC, shows how reliable that is. And it fails to give a name or designation for any of the systems it mentions. I find it difficult to understand how the article can comment on the radar when knowbody actually knows which of 4 potential radars it may eventually carry. :rolleyes:
there currently 6 MIG-29M with MIG and one of it is OVT. so it is MIG-29M with TVC. so how it is wrong in designation. and ready to launch into mass production means that u can order today and get aircraft in next couple of months not couple of years. just like Algeria got MIG-29SMT (have new IRST) and Venzuella will get SU-30 in less than six months after signing.
star49Then you must think that the “rival” is not yet in series production. That leaves one aircraft: the F-35. When did the MiG-35 become a stealth aircraft?
are u sure that when F-35 enters production its rcs wouldnot be detectable by modern radars?
So if one nation, lets say Australia, buys the Rafale instead of the F-22A, that automatically means the Rafale is superior by your logic. See the problem now? There’s a lot more to it then just arbitrarily declaring the winner the unanimously superior aircraft because it won. That is just not the way things work in the real world.
Australlia would not chose rafale because it has the money to buy F-22 and it will chose F-22. try put some better example.
Destroy what with it’s cannon? The missile? Get real. The aircraft behind you? Go ahead. That deacceleration maneuver just let my WVR AAM seriously close the gap with your aircraft.
here is another claim (from Su-32)similar to MIG-35 about destroying missiles. these are new claims.
In particular, the aircraft can destroy an enemy’s guided missiles (presumably from an enemy fighter), something no other aircraft worldwide can do.
star49Actually there are Zero, 0, nil, none Mig-35’s. The Mig-29OVT is basically just a technology demonstrator for the engines and flight control systems. It has no radar, no weapons systems no ecm etc. Of course that does not stop some people saying it could bring down a Typhoon. :rolleyes:
Offcourse some people cant read when it is clearly stated that it is ready to launch into mass production so how can it is without avionics and weopons? offcourse no one brings real things into air shows. It has new generation of IRST, Radar with LPI features, EW suite to defeat the missiles and designed to physicaly outperform Super Flanker. ur typhoon does not even have its own BVR and has pathetic anti-ship, anti-radiation and has less internal fuel capacity. performance is dubious
http://www.royfc.com/news/may/1206may05.html
The fighter has a digital fly-by-wire control system, is equipped with vectored thrust engines and the newest fire control system which includes itself an improved optical location system ((OPTIKO-LOKATSIONNAYA STANTSIYA)), which allows detection of airborne targets at a significant distance while not giving itself away by operation of the radar, and the newest radar, which allows detecting different types of aerial, ground and maritime targets, including those built using “stealth” ((STELS)) technologies.In comparison with the series 9-12 and 9-13 MiG-29, which serve now in Russia’s air force inventory, the MiG-29M has an increased flight range – owing to more economic engines and the present of an in-flight refueling system, a greater bomb load owing to an increase of the number of hard points and greater maneuverability. The new MiG also is equipped with an “intelligent cockpit” with liquid crystal panels on the instrument panel and a helmet-mounted target designation system ((NASHLEMNAYA SISTEMA TSELEUKAZANIYA)).
star49You can’t make that assumption. You’re being ignorant of financial and political considerations, as well as the simple fact that they may have made their decision on performance grounds unrelated to how well the R-77 does or does not perform.
why i cant make that assumption? did RMAF made the decision in one day or they were evaluating those aircraft for 3 or 4 years and they have clearly told JED online about air to air performance and antiship missiles.
Give me a Gripen or Rafale with Meteor and I’ll take down two MiG-35s. Superior weapons range does make a difference.
Missiles does not travel at speed of light nor t here accelaration is instantaneous. even in wvr combat there is plenty of time for MIG-35 to turn around destroy it with canon or use its advance EW suite. they are not even mentioning of missiles.
The successful mastery and use of these manoeuvres in close aerial combat will leave the pilots of enemy aircraft no chance of success. No need laboriously to try to get behind the enemy fighter. A lightning-fast somersault, and the enemy is in the sights of a rapid-fire cannon.
Sign In
