Why a smaller wing area? Wing area is actually going to help a fighter, not the other way round.

Hmm, if you refer to wingloading; it might not necessarily be the case. I could be wrong here but certain fighters are not so dependent on wingloading/area as others for performance/lift. In terms of legacy, 70s designs – the F-16, F-18, MiG-29 and Su-27+ come to mind – they all had relatively high wingloading, which was somewhat offset by the use of LERX. IIRC, as much as 40% of total lift for the fulcrum came from its body. The F-15 otoh relied on low wingloading and superhigh TWR for performance.

I daresay, the suggestion made by Roylarson could have some merit. No need for flanker wings – but something with a greater sweep and the additional thrust (which is a HUGE amount more) would do a grand job; wing area be damned. Hmm, does Boeing have any spies on this forum – Scoot are you paying attention? :dev2:
JMT
USS.

U sure?? 200 km is awfully lot even in radar X-band.
I think, this “several times” you mentioned, is more like 1.5 times (~70km), or less.
The fact that range was given with a note of AB is indicative and I’d say 35’s OLS works in IR/TV band and 45km is a very good score for that band.

No, not sure just guesstimating based on the original IRST fitted on the 29. What makes you continue to think that the 35 does not have an IIR mode?

USS.

Why are you looking at a munition like a Pakistani ballistic missile for the MRCA? It does not make any sense to me.

Possibly early deliveries of Meteor will be expensive, but the same goes for AIM-120D. But if India is to buy expensive BVR capable fighters with AESA radars, why be cheap and buy missiles that cant exploit all its capabilities?

http://www.saffm.hq.af.mil/shared/media/document/AFD-080204-085.pdf

If India wants a cheap missile for MRCA, why not go for ASTRA? I dont know its price, but it should logically be the cheapest, possibly cheaper than even old versions of AMRAAM.

Whether it is the AMRAAM, Meteor or Mica; the price would be heavy. However, my guess is that all MRCA candidates will be equipped with the indigeneous ASTRA – similar to the r77 or amraam c5. So this ought not to be an issue for any of the MRCA candidates gripenNG included.

USS.

1. Putting all your eggs in one basket.

2. Lack of support for the platform in its home country.

3. The cost of upgrades bearing down on IAF.

Point 2 – Not a problem so far. India already has experience with the MKI. Ditto with the Naval fulcrum. Also, the russians seem to be eager to order a few MiG-29Ks as well. Again, not much of an issue with fulcrum upgrade prices. Problem with the MiG-35 imho is simply that the IAF does not want it – for whatever reason – they don’t seem to want to come close to it with a 10 foot pole. Perhaps they feel the need to diversify is greater than commonalize. The first point you make is probly the biggest drawback for the fulcrum and there is precious little they can do to overcome it.

USS.

The max range for PIRATE has been claimed ~150km and I’d imagine that being against target on AB at high Mach number.

I’d be surprised if it was not using AB too. In any case, the original Mig-29 IRST itself was capable of 20km detection for non AB targets; for afterburning targets, the range was “several times” that figure. I’d imagine that the OLS on the 35 would similarly have a detection range several times the one quoted for non AB targets (45km?). Even the OLS 30 on the now older su-30 is about 90km for AB targets iirc.

USS.

The Topaz might be a little different thing. In which way did they try to break the lock, just by manoeuvering? Anyway it’s quite unspecific and there is no indication that the Topaz is so much better at all. The Zhuk-M would be an entirely different beast.

Scorp,

AFAIK, the vipers would be ltd to manouvering (for lock breaking), I am not sure on what kind of ECM fit PAF vipers used in the late 90s. As far as the Topaz thing goes, it was just to point out that not all MiG-29s were as handicapped as those flown by the Luftwaffe. I would think, in consequence of the abovementioned incident as well as its superiority in the A2A arena vs. the IAF m2k, that the sets deployed by the IAF (although still the N019) were quite capable. Not all the tinkering that an AF (esp. one as secretive as the IAF) is open to the public eye. For instance, while the original IAF Baaz had the Sirena RWR; images on the net show that circa 2003, it was already fitted with a Tarang variant.

Cola,

I dunno what you mean by lack of IIR or range on the MiG-35 OLS. Evidentally, it has IIR capability and excellent ranges (all those that you see are for non AB targets only, afterburning targets would be detected at ranges several times those that are quoted).

Still, afaik IRSTs remain handicapped by the fact that they offer no firing solutions. This is possible only through laser targeting, which are limited to around 20km.

USS.

USS

All well and good, but it still doesn’t mean a whole lot and not even turning on the burner is pure exaggeration which is expected from all fighter jocks. This article explains USAF pilot views on the Mig-29s they faced. http://www.codeonemagazine.com/archives/1995/articles/jul_95/july2a_95.html

Couple of things to be aware of – a) the luftwaffe Mig-29s had derated engines. IOWs, most of the problems that the F-16 jocks talk about in the article are related to power issues – not a problem with russian or IAF fulcrums of the same vintage (mig-29a/c). Also, radar wise, the MiG-29 with an NO19 would be quite a handful for those F-16Cs. Again, something the germans did not have. Interestingly there is absolutely no mention of IRSTs in that article, didn’t the germans have IRSTs? I think most Mig-29s did.

Further, the newer MiG-29s have all these issues taken care of – better avionics, better range, better SA, even more power, relaxed stability. Yes, the viper has a better turn rate compared to the handicapped Luftwaffe fulcrums. It might be another story when facing better equipped opponents.

It might be even more difficult for the viper against a truly modernized MiG-29M.

USS.

At the risk of getting the mirage 2000, F-16 mafia after me; I dare say the MiG-29SMT or MiG-29K will kick both their butts A2A, BVR/WVR. :diablo:

The fulcrum radar/missile outranges the F-16MLU as well as the Mirage 2000, one in terms of missiles (R77 vs Mica) and the other in terms of radar (Zhuk M vs Apg68).

WVR, even the basic fulcrum would be a pain for the m2k/f-16; the upgraded ones with the new OLS would be a notch ahead for the most part. Not to mention the legendary nose pointing ability and slow speed turning of the fulcrum.

A2G is another story, at least for the SMT.

USS.