Your critics are up to some point correct, no one denies that Brazil to make a Nuclear submarine needs more expertise however i do not agree with all your statements because Brazil is follwing a very smart policy with Embraer.

Civillian nuclear reactor does not led to modern SSN. there plenty of example countries making civillian reactors but not manageing even a decent diesel sub.

True the Embraer jets are not completly designed in Brazil however they are sold more than the Tu-204, Tu-334, Il-96 and very likely they won`t loose too much market against the Superjet 100, why? simply because as in the case of the Boeing 777 in Japan, the E-170 family also benefits the national economies of Japan, Germany, France and the US, see in fact the E-170 is well sold in Europe and even in Canada Home of Bombardier

http://www.revistafatorbrasil.com.br/ver_noticia.php?not=24962
http://www.val-s.com/v4p.htm

Russisa is not interested in selling stuff to West based on Western science It isnt a cheap factory. thats why they are developing Tu-204SM, Tu-334, MS-21. Along with previous models. Russians are direct supplier of science to West so whats the point of assembling.

Russia can not do that. unless it starts increasing the content of western equipment in their aircraft, why? simply because the Western countries use protectionist standards to fight other competitors, you need to have some western elements to be sold well in the West.

It is the Western companies in Russia that are building export base taking advantage of Geopgraphical location of Eurasian continent along with natural resoruces and scientific expertize. Russia does not need to create its own brands in consumer stuff as the rest of world is eager to supply. it is simply too rich.

True Brazil is uncapable of designing many parts domestically even despite some parts of the manufacturing process has been taken to Brazil, but who cares? if you are making money.

There is big difference in making money.

Embraer sells more than Tupolev and Sukhoi and makes more money, in fact Embraer is one of the largest companies in the world.

Sukhoi does not need to be that big like Boeing consuming all its energies servicing client requests for maintainance/support throught out the world.
it has to serve Russian airforce along with maintaining strategic independence for air transportation.

In a globalized world you need to think global, not regional.

when u are too much globalized (dependency) it decrease ur ability to act independently.

It applies to any industry, why Argentina never developed a great aircraft industry? well it was because they always wanted national pride instead of practical affordable goods, and for that reason their programs never got beyond low production numbers domestic programs who is buying the IA-63? the Pucara was well sold but very simple, in latin america we need to globalize and Embraer is a good pattern of globalization.

Same is the AMX, true Brazil has very little share in the program but at least the aircraft gave some expertise and was more successful than any other military jet program ever carried by any latin american nation.

Now Argentina has designed a commercial Nuclear reactor, Brazil wants to share the commercail aspects of this new reactor and wants to create an electric generating nuclear plant in partnership with Argentina, this is the first step to make a nuclear submarine first you have to make money later you can do military programs, this was also a good example of the ERJ-145, first make it a commercial success later you make it an AWACS

The US and NASA also is full of latin scientists and researchers, this does not mean that if in latin america we take tech transfer like Gradiente does we are doing something wrong, no we need to take tech transfers later we can build our own designs.

Brazil has fail building the nuclear submarine up to now that is true, however it is alo because past governments did not consider it a key program, now at least both governments know if they do not make the submarines at least they will exploit the local nuclear knowledge for civil programs and will benefit the population of Mercosur, and this is good.

ur constantly relating Civillian nuclear reactor to SSN & Embarer to Airplane industry. i have serous doubts not only about this SSN interms of technical terms about money/project management.

You should better stop argueing about things you obviously don’t know! The MiG-29M2 was developed from the late 90s and first flown on 26th september 2001, hardly an aircraft from the 80s. The MiG-29M prototype which was used as the base for the demonstrator was 80s tech, but if you argue that way the MiG-35 demonstrator first flown in january 2007 under that designation is 80s tech too, because it is the very same aircraft!

thats what i am saying. MIG-29M2 tech belong to 80s except for Radar. MIG didnot develop anything new in the 90s. Thats why they are relating MIG-35 to MIG-29K not to MIG-29M.

Doesn’t change the fact that the RMAF ordered the type in 2003 and received its first aircraft in 2007. Nothing to discuss here as it is as it is!!!

And aircraft wasnt developed let alone replacing avionics. which is not the case with MIG-35.

Algeria insisted that it will buy the Su-30MKA back in early 2005, so there was enough time for preparations and given the fact that the MKM and MKA are almost identical there is no great deal to get the airframes ready fast enough.

can u show any serious report from 2005 about MKA. that time they were only interested in MIG-29.

No one said the Zhuk-MAE demonstrator doesn’t work… It is just one of many accusations of you over me.

thats ur mistake constantly confusing capabilities with development.

I spoke about the MiG-29K, not about the Su-30MKI! The Su-30MKI was only brought as an example for the engines and airframe being ready back in 1997, while deliveries did not began before 2002 (5 years later)!

so u think MIG-35 is project of same complexity as Flanker was in mid 90s?

RAC MiG started with the development of the new MiG-29K/M family (9.41/9.47/9.61/9.67) back in the late 90’s after India insisted that it might buy the navalised variant together with the Gorshkov carrier!

how do u know MIG-29K Practical development started in late 90s when there was NO funding & Sign agreement? Remember it is 90s. MIG was in worse shape.

Deliveries will only start this year and that means a time frame of ~10 years from starting with the development until the first aircraft are delivered. I do not say it will take another 10 years before the MiG-35 can be delivered, but it will take about 5 years or so before you will see any production MiG-35 being delivered, if there will be orders from a customer at all!

Again illogical assumptions. how long deliveries of MKM/MKA took? minor avionics does not matter as long as airframe is developed.

Bla bla, you dance around the fact that there was no testbed for the Zhuk-MAE before the MiG-35 demonstrator. The Zhuk-MAE itself is just a very first prototype and no operational device and the MiG-35 (no.154) is very much a testbed for a final MiG-35 variant which has yet to fly, like the Su-30MK2 (503) and Su-27Ms (708 & 710) were testbeds for sub components of the new Su-35 which actually flys in a production representive configuration )Su-35-1 no 901) unlike the MiG-35!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

and u have evidence of that? MIG-35 is fully funcitonal radar with Ground modes not a prototype. Su-35 components were tested on other aircrafts but MIG-35 compoenents are flying since January 2007 under MIG-29K.

Honestly you start to get on my nerves once again and I’m not willed to continue any discussion with you as long as you twist around and turn my statements wrong! Fact is the MiG-35 doesn’t exist in a production representive configuration and even if it is ordered today it will still take years before first production aircraft can be delivered. End of discussion.

I have already explained that it didnot took that many years considering the complexity of MIG-29K. so why MIG-35 which is much simpler project will take?

Piotr Butowski. MAK-2005
In March 2004, the modernized 117S (117A?) engine began flight tests on the experimental Su-27M ‘710’ fighter plane. In June 2005, after completion of a series of flights with one exchanged engine, the same aircraft got two modernized engines. Up to now, five modernized engines have been built.

The MiG-35 demonstrator is as the designation suggest a demonstrator, it wouldn’t be strange if Zhuk-MAE wasn’t tested before. So just unveil the source and good is. There is no need to spam the forum without contributing anything useful.

see above why they are testing engine on another aircraft. They could just wait fo real Su-35 to fly for testing the engines. Radar testing is no exception.

Brazil also has car industry and is growing fast too
Obvio a brazilian designed and made car

Lobini a brazilian designed car

can u supply this car to BMW/VW to sell it under there own brand name. the answer is no. Boeing/IBM are both direct customers and collaoborators of Russian IT.

http://www.ibs-company.com/content/eng/rubr41/rubr-416.asp
International customers

ABB Industry

Bacardi

British American Tobacco

Boeing

British Petroleum

Conoco Phillips

Deloitte & Touche

Erismann

Ford

Gedore Werkzeuge

General Motors

GP Morgan

IBM

L’Oreal Group

Lufthansa

Mars

MARY KAY

Nestle

Philip Morris

Procter&Gamble

Renault

SEB Groupe

Sheraton Group

Shell

Tetra Pak

Zurich Insurance Company (Russia) Ltd

I’m well aware about the variants of the Fulcrum and Flanker family so there is no need to discuss this with me. Fact is there’re still a couple of changes and before the aircraft reaches the production state it is necessary to finalise the complete design including its equipment and not just the airframe and engines. If so why wasn’t the Su-30MKI already delivered back in 1998? The aircraft existed at that time (airframe & engines)! The reason why the Su-30MKI wasn’t delivered before 2002 is due the fact that the avionics equippment wasn’t finalised and fully developed at that time. A combat aircraft without working avionics is worth as much as a car without fuel.

Su-30MKI certified in 1998? so what is this than.

http://www.irkut.com/en/news/news_archives/index.php?id48=120
The “Certificate of the AL-31FP life-time” was signed on October 6, 2004, by the leadership of the Russian Ministry of Defence, the Central Aviation Engines Institute (CIAM), “NPO “Saturn”, UMPO, SUKHOI Corporation and IRKUT Corporation

Pretty much the same procedure with MIG-29K. everything is certified under customer supervision.

The Su-35 was well defined before and the RuAF is claimed to have ordered the type. Development is running since 2003 so it took about 5 years just to get the aircraft airborne. It will yet take another 1 to 2 years or so before the airraft enters production. In contrast to the MiG-35 the Su-35 prototype is said to be a production representive design. That is not the case with the MiG-35 demonstrator, which is more or less an avionics testbed based on an old airframe (ex MiG-29M board number 154).

Do u think Su-35 engine/internal fuel capacity/FBW as anything in common with earlier Su-30MK? like MIG-29K engine/FBW/internal fuel capacity with MIG-35

Irbis was in fact flown onboard the Su-30MK2 (no. 503), but which aircraft has tested an AESA radar before the MiG-35 demonstrator? I don’t know a single one, so enlighten me which was it!?

so do u think MIG is not testing ZHuk-A for couple years on MIG-29SMT.?

The entire discussion was about multirole not generation XY, you simply brought up that issue to deviate from your crappy argumentation about the Gripen not bei9ng multirole from the beginning.

you simply clearly not understanding. Generations are 1, 2, 3, 4, 5. multirole Capabilities are “+” “++”

I speak about entry into service not first flight. RAC MiG began to pave the way for the new MiG-29K/KUB since the late 90s, the aircraft almost took 10 years to develope and it still hasn’t been delivered. And the MiG-29K is not exactly a completely new design, but a new derivate of an existing type. Taking usual timeframes from order to delivery into account, it will took 3-4 years from order until the first aircraft are delivered, but this requires the aircraft configuration (including avionics etc.) being finalised! So 2012 is already a quite optimistic date!

There are two kinds of MIG-29K. One the old one with RD-33K engines and smaller wing that belongs to 1980s. this one is completely different with MTOW of 24000KG, larger wing. along with 6000hr airframe life, 4000hr engine life, new glass cockpit/IRST. this is completely different aircraft with 15% composites. MIG-35 does not face any such complexity as everything is already certified under customer supervision.

You can’t limit the aircraft to its airframe or engine, you have to see the entire design including airframe, engines, avionics etc. Before a production ready design exists it takes quite some time, even if it is a derivate only! You seem to have no idea about the complexity of that topic.

Engine & airframe is the whole thing. once that is done the rest does not matter. Just lookt at Su-35. once engine was delvired first flight was with in 6 months. with full production in less two years.

No one said that, but the truth is that no AESA radar has flown on an operational type before in Russia. If you know it better prove it! If not save my time.

do u think that IRBIS flown on Su-35 in february hast been flown before on another aircraft. There was no MIG-29SMT testing for Zhuk-A.

Lol what a crap, honestly I won’t discuss such nonsense.

why not. Every fighter generation starts with whole number & than u can add “Pluses” as capabilities increase. what so hard to understand.

Yes but that is not the Mig-35 is it.:rolleyes:

The fact is that the Mig-35 has not flown.

what part of 90% unification u dont understand?. There is brochure from AERO India right on this form.
Gripen with AESA/F-18E land based/F-16Blk70-IN hasnt flown yet. so ?
RD-33 equiped fighter has advantage as the engine went to hot climate of India for almost two decades. u cant say that about M-88/EJ-200 engine to that climate. so does it mean M-88/EJ-200 for IAF does not exist.