star49actually India is very demanding customer. u have increase the thrust of engine , reduce its weight and increase service life to 4000hrs. so u can imagine how much advance that MIG-35 will be to meet IAF requirements for future.
Service life of MIG-29K engines, delivered to India, to be considerably extended
ST.PETERSBURG. April 28 (Interfax-AVN) – The Klimov plant is working on considerably extending the service life of RD-33MK aircraft engines to be mounted on MIG-29K Fulcrum shipborne fighters, being delivered to India, Klimov Plant Designer General Vladimir Shirmanov told Interfax-Military News Agency on Wednesday.
“The Indian side demanded a two-fold increase in the service life of the RD-33MK aircraft engine,” he said.Shirmanov noted that this task would primarily depend on the Moscow-based Chernyshev Engine-Building Enterprise, which mass- produces the engine in question.
“The All-Russian Light Alloys Institute has already proposed new technologies for manufacturing components of the engines. However, the technologies proper have been tested only by this institute. Much will depend on the Chernyshev Enterprise’s introducing these technologies to series production,” Shirmanov says.
He noted that the engine to be mounted on the MIG-29K shipborne fighters was a modification of the RD-33 engine of the 3M series. The engine boasts an anti-corrosive coat over the gas- air duct, which protects its components from seawater vapor. The engine is designed to operate in adverse (tropical) weather conditions. In addition to that, the RD-33MK will be fitted with a fuel jettisoning system, a smokeless combustion chamber, and an emergency takeoff mode
The weight of the engine has been reduced by 100 kg by fitting the engine with the BARK-88 automatic adjustment and control unit.RD-33 engines of the second series feature a mean-time- between-failures of 350-700 hours, and a design service life of 1,200-1,400 hours, while RD-33 engines of the third series boast feature a mean-time-between-failures of 1,000 hours, and a design service life of 2,000 hours.
star49Mig-29SMT/SMT2 is useally quoted at 30 mil $. Mig-29 with PESA and OVT useally quoted with 35 mil $ at most. Try to find F-16 and F-18 with such prices…. Nobody said what new Mig-29 is cheap. But certainly *cheaper* than new F-series.
the only new MIG-29 price is MIG-29K for $45m in 2004.
it does not include PESA and TVC. the rest is just speculation.
star49Because no actual MiG-35 demonstrator has yet been flown. Some systems have been tested on other FULCRUMs, but they haven’t all been assembled in a MiG-35 yet. Ergo, paper plane.
so Rafale/EF/Gripen with AESA exist that they are entering this IAF competition? by that definition most of the planes are paper.
star49The MiG-35 is a proposal from MiG to have chances in the competition. They don’t have the prototype, lots of key areas are still in doubt (TVC, radar).
how is MIG-35 a paper plane when MIG-29M2/OVT is flying and same klimov TVC is going to AL-31 engines destined to China. there is 90% comonality with MIG-29K of IN. they redesignate it MIG-35 because of AESA.
India is interested in Russian bids to pull down prices. After all, the presence of cheap Russian hardware with sometimes pretty reasonable performance reduces the price tag of an F-16 or F-18.
It is a myth that new built MIG-29s are cheaper than F-teen series with same level of advancement.
The MiG-29 haven’t been used in large numbers in any “advanced” version. Even the Eurofighter is due to pass the non-A models in service by the end of this year. the F-22, having 3 to 6 times the price of any post-A model, will be deployed in larger numbers from 2007 on.
just combine the whole MIG-29 upgrades orders with MIG-29K. it comes to 150 aircraft. so alteast better than Rafale and EF. and i doubt F-22 numbers will surpass it nor they are 3 to 6 times expensive.
Once again, the MiG-29 is a great design, but it was (like many MiG designs before) a very specialised airframe for the use in the PVO under cold war conditions for a clearly defined mission. Later models lacked the political and financial backing of a strong partner country. It is, however, interesting to see how half of the objectives for MiG-29 development were failed and the whole project was in jeopardy in the middle 1970s.
offcourse MIG-29 is a great design thats why it is chosen for carrier operations and further upgrades. MIG-29K gives nothing in performance to Rafale/EF/F-18.
star49That’s rich, go and research that one and disprove yourself.
On what planet. Just because two products come out in the same time period does not mean they are comparable in terms of ability or quality.
now u twist my statements. i started with IAF. u should not apply this analogy to other countries or products.
That’s because anyone still using the MiG-21 or a derivative thereof needs to either massively upgrade it, or have their heads examined. And no, an active BVR weapon is not mandatory for self-defense, especially when you have other fighters in your air arm that can serve as escorts just fine.
u said they need more Strike Fighters thats why giving multi-role ability to MIG-29. giving expensive upgrades to MIG-21 indicates otherwise.
Well then I guess you should have specified new-build, shouldn’t you? But wait…aren’t the Yemeni SMTs new-build aircraft! Uh oh!
Yemeni MIG-29s arent even full SMT standard. so even bringing that is irrelevant.
star49Right analogy. You were referring to aircraft built during the same time period being of the same technological level. Which is an invalid assumption anyway.
I stated IAF M2K. they havent been upgraded. and it is perfectly understandable that all these aircraft more or less the same level.
Because there’s no threat warranting more air defense aircraft, but they need more strike platforms.
they are continoulsy upgrading MIG-21. alteast M2K can do better than that. now days u need active bvr for self protection any way along with SAR radar for strike.
You said:
“how u come to this conclusion that Fulcrum is cheaper than F-18E/Rafale?”
where u not mention SMT?
i didnot said Fulcrum upgrade. I said Fulcrum which means new built. there is mrore prospect for MIG-29K with second IN carrier. which means this aircraft is relevant.
star49We’re building the F-22A in the 2000’s. China is building the J-10. Those aircraft came from the same era. They are in no way on the same technological level. Same with the MiG-29 and M2K.
wrong analogy. MIG-29 of IAF is air defence fighter with HMS, BVR etc while Mirage is strike fighter. so why give multirole capability to MIG-29? but denying the Mica/RDY capability to M2K? they are at the same level.
Well, first there was this gem from CLEAR WAR:
“The SMT is more advanced than a F-16 BLOCK 60”
Now, you tell me, how much are SMT’s going for these days?
where i mentioned SMT? still the price of slot array SMT is closer to $40m. it is nothing like new build MIG-35 offer.
star49Not if the M2K had a better avionics, systems, and weapons fit than the MiG-29s did.
nope. IAF M2K is 1980s era machine. MIG-29 is at same technological level.
Irrelevant, as those aircraft are not in the FULCRUM’s price range. The issue is why the FULCRUM, being substantially cheaper than the other aircraft, isn’t getting more orders. If you want to know why the F-18E and Rafale aren’t selling, compare them to their contemporaries, not to the jet which some “people” believe to be cheaper yet superior.
how u come to this conclusion that Fulcrum is cheaper than F-18E/Rafale? Fulcrum with active phased array radar and advanced material construction will be closer in price to above two aircrafts.
star49.
No, it shows that they wanted to upgrade their FULCRUMs. India was among the original FULCRUM export customers, remember. Their MiG-29s have been there for quite some time now.
there M2K came before MIG-29. so M2K should be inline if it is much better fighter for future.
Which has been sold in limited numbers to one customer.
so where is F-18E/Rafale sold for foreign aircraft carrier.
star49MIG-29 advanced version sale is like selling F-18E in export market in presence of F-15.
the fact that IAF chose to upgrade MIG-29s but left M2k alone shows that fighter has a future. there is MIG-29K. and new MIG-35 is competing against Rafale/F-18E/EF.
star49also one important thing missing is the climb rate. comparision is only limited to turn rates at different heights and speeds but it does not give any time required for each aircraft to reach those height figures from brake release.
star49Oh…it does have better turn rates than F/A-18 and very close to F-16.
ur chart is repeateldy referring to MIG-29 higher TWR vs F-16C. I doubt that will be the case if F-16C is block 30 GE engine at that time. and u cannot compare relaxed stability digital fbw machine with substandard soviet era jet whose engine thrust is in doubt.
star49The problem isn’t selling the aircraft or weapons. The problem is transferring the highly sensitive technology on how to build the weapon and it’s systems. For instance, the software codes that run the hi-tech computers. I think you’ll note that when the US sells a weapon to India, Pakistan, etc. they don’t get the computer software or the software codes to maintain them beyond basic repair. They basically get very downgraded weapons when compared to the U.S. version.
What we’re talking about here is stealth, avionics, and computer technology.
there is big difference between selling 10 or 20 aircraft to country like Singapore and selling over 100 aircraft to another country. and they intend to use that aircraft for next 40 years.
when so much money is at stake. the customer expect full operatinal soverignty. In UK case it would be RR engine, BAE EW Suite and ability to integrate MBDA weopons and control of maintainance and upgradation.
afterall they are buying 150 aircraft for Full Price. so u cannot sell down graded version if u are askiing for full price. Similar will be F-18E for India. it is clearly stated that they want complete TOT. so u cannot compare this thing to cheap second hand F-16s.
star49Okay, here is what I was looking for. It explains America’s concerns even better than I did, and it shows why America is reluctant to just hand over technology. This piece comes from EU Referendum.
Now, according to this article, secrets have been leaked to China. I have no idea what they are and of how they were leaked. But you can read the article here.
http://eureferendum.blogspot.com/2006_02_01_eureferendum_archive.html
Just scroll down to “JSF in Parliament!”
by that logice u cannot sell any weopon of worth to any where in the world. how will u sell F-18E with all the offsets requirement to India when they have 50 years of relationship with russians. similar is the case with South Korea now.http://research.samsung.ru/
we are living in globalized economic model where each multinational has branches every where and looking for best talent. so flow of information is much faster.
star49What, Russia is the leader of G8? News for me. The might have presidency for a limited time, but that actually reflects a 0% increase in power.
u are still not comprehending it. It says russia influence will increase in G8 if it can make Oil and gas cartel that will impose prices of its own on the rest of world. It does not says that its importance increase by merely sitting in G8.
its from same article.
http://en.rian.ru/analysis/20060315/44370983.html
It looks like these scenarios start materializing. In mid-November 2005, Kazakhstan and Russia signed an agreement on gas transit from Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan. De facto Gazprom has taken control over the gas resources of these three republics.
If Algeria would invest the surplus money in anything useful except of weapons they would have more gain. However, there might be nothing really useful exportable from Russia except oil and arms. Very sad heritage of communism.
and from where that surplus money will come from? obviously from Higher Oil and gas prices and more technical expertize and investment in that sector.
so Oil and Arms are not useful?
Sign In
