The original MiG-29K was based on the MiG-29M airframe with 8 hardpoints (9 if you count the centerline tank). The new MiG-29K is based on an improved airframe which may or may not have commonality with the MiG-35, but is lighter and does have a further enlarged spine for increased internal fuel capacity.

Thanks much; just to clarify: the “original” one that you are referring to is the one tested before 1992, correct?
Some more questions: Is the MiG 29SMT based more on the original A series or the Mig 29k, in other words, how is it different from either? Is the airframe lighter than the K?
Secondly, can you or any resident expert confirm that the newer MiG 29k carries around 5500 kg payload? It seems logical to assume that since the newer MiG 29k is lighter and the MiG 35 even lighter than the MiG 29k, it should indeed be able to carry more payload than the original version or perhaps even the SMT version esp. since the range on the SMT seems to be just as much as the K/M?

Thanks again for clearing the cobwebs.

Regards,
USS.

Go the mig official website

http://www.migavia.ru/eng

I checked and this is what I found:

MiG 29k/2: range on internal fuel 1 850/1 600
Weapon load, kg 4500

The payload is the same for the M/35, which is a lot (800kg) lighter but the range increases to 2000km.

But I could not find the 5500kg number quoted by Star, just wondering if he had any other sources.

This MiG 35 is no doubt awesome, in range it is v. competitive with the M2k-5/f16blk50. I have no idea about Rafale range on internal fuel but it better be a lot more for an a/c that is larger. The MiG 35 could use more payload though, 4500kg is nothing like the f16 or even the m2k.

Regards,
USS.

That’d matter little. The MiG’s unshielded compressor faces would be big RCS issues. So would the non-treated cockpit, the non-optimized panel joints, the internal framework, etc
When an aircraft is designed from the outset with a reduced RCS in mind, like the Rafale was, it certainly makes a difference….

No doubt the Rafale and Efighter have perhaps a lower rcs than the MiG but kinda hard to say, just as the Euros claim that their fighters have lo stealth, the Russians do tend to say that they have reduced the MiG 29Ms RCS by X10, so the difference would be marginal at best.

Russia has abandoned the baseline R-77 for purchase in favor of developing the ramjet-powered variant. Basic R-77s are pretty much for export only, and as such at this point an exported MiG-35 is likely to be using the baseline R-77.

I thought the Ram jet power one was R77M1? For now yes, the MiG 35 would use r77 but by the same token, for now the Rafale uses Mica only or perhaps Amraam as well.

… Unless you consider the operating environment and the doctrine and training caliber of both user nations, you’re not going to get anything remotely close to an accurate assessment, but rather something more laong the lines of a fanboy fantasy.

I would agree completely; precisely the reason why there is absolutely no need to indulge in fantasies like taking on 2 mig 35s with one gripen / rafale. In the network centric scenario that the IAF is looking to develop, most MRCA and LCA types should be datalinked with bigger friends like AWACS or MKI anyway and would probly be used in a silent snipe type role making the usefulness of one excellent a/c @ an exhorbitantly expensive tag a little redundant IMHO. Teamwork and tactics would be more important. As WC Rathore explained in the Mission Udaan series on NGeographic, excellent tactics can be used to overcome slight (or even large) gaps in tech during ACM. Agreed a Rafale (my favorite Euro choice), would probly offer greater options in determining tactics, but not by so much. Like I said, EF2000/Gripen should not even be considered. Also Rafales and E2000s are more in the Flanker class of a/c; won’t their roles overlap?

What, one of them on the centerline? For one, the missile is aboslutely huge and probably cannot be carried underwing due to a few different reasons. Secondly, the KS-172 is a project right now, and isn’t even mentioned as being integrated with any avionics set.

If they can study and think of carrying a Yakhont on a Mig 29, why not a KS 172?

Regards,
USS.

Sorry boss, on this (thankfully) you are very much wrong, all i can say! 😮

Nick and er ahem other “informed” members :),

Any reason why India chose KS 172 and not R37? IIRC, the latter seems much lighter (500kg VS 700kg) and has seen use with the RuAF (MiG 31s carry them right?).

Regards,
USS.

Huh? Don’t you think that the pilot shortage in the IAF would have been easily solved if they lowered their recruitment standards? The guys who get in are the cream, not common labor.

Harry, nobody is denying that IAF has excellent pilots, and those standards DON”T have to be lowered. All i was trying to say is that they would still find excellent pilots in India if they had more squads to fly (in the context of my discussion with B_I_O, 125 ef2000 VS 200 Mig 35). If IAF gets to the 55 sqd strength that was supposed to be, surely they will find more pilots. Esp. if their salaries+perks are improved and the “flying coffin” is replaced and Hawks and IJTs come into play.

By the way thanks for clarifying the RCS issues. That helps. The Russian reports have led me to believe that they have a certain edge in RAM stuff. will it be enough to surpass or equal the Euro’s LO shaped designs? I have no idea. But considering that their RAM coatings with powerful radars made it difficult for F16 blk 50s (supposed to have RCS of 1msq), i don’t think the Euro designs would have such a great advantage over the Mig 35 A2A being larger a/cs than the MiG and having external payloads.

India has plans for 5th Generation fighters, they will get them when they need them. India do not intend to fight US nor does the US want to fight India. So we do not need expensive F-22’s, MKI’s can do a great job fending off other fourth generation fighters in its borders, thats what we need. Thats our requirement.

cmon just think how many aircrafts in the world can face MKI and live to tell the tale?????? atleast around its borders.

Sharko, i was not referring to India’s particular requirements here. i was just trying to refute B_I_O’s claim that I belonged to a certain school of thought. F22 was just an example, my point simply was that I would feel exhorbitant costs are justified if IAF gets a totally stealthy 5th gen a/c like f22/pakfa, but not so for a Euro design that has at best sketchy technological advantages over an MKIzed MiG 35. This bird would be like a baby MKI, certainly enough to take care of neighborhood threats, don’t you think? Sorry if i was not clear enough.

Regards,
USS.

So you want to simulate what the avionics went into the MKI on the mig-35?? India hasnt even chosen the Mig-35 over the rest of the fighters in competition. The MKI’s radar wont fit the Mig-35 and we can only speculate what else india would want from the various suppliers they go for. For the other mig-29’s they didnt go the AESA route (check the previous thread ) SO you donot know what they will choose. we can pin point to a direction but at the end they might not decide to choose one thing over the other that is why I am saying that it is pure speculation so I suggest that we stick to the varient that we know and that is the planned Russian version of the Mig-35..

When was the last time indian armed forces bought anything from russia without very specific customizatioin? it would be quite contrary to current trends to think that IAF will just buy plain vanilla mig 35. Sure the IN didn’t go with an AESA for the limited order (16 a/c followed by another 40 at most), but they still have the topsight/tarang/el8222 jammer don’t they? But that does not mean that the IAF will have the same configuration for a $ 5-8 billion order (highly unlikely IMHO, the russians in fact made it a point to offer an AESA because it was believed the IAF absolutely demanded it). Again, as far as current specs go i’d like to see how much of a real difference there is between the Zhuk M and the Captor, both being slotted arrays. It is not for nothing that the Mirage 2000-5 was replaced by the Rafale in the MRCA competition; the French probly felt that it just wouldn’t hold its own in a field which had a/c like f18ef, mig35 and gripen. Of course the official reason was that the line was being closed down. 😉

I think I stated my point clear enough . All I am saying is that the mig-21 when ram treated was able to get its RCS down to levels where it made detection “tricky” Even the USAF pilots with their F-15’s and F-16’s found it a little difficult (again talk to harry) therefore I am trying to make the point that even with weapon loads (a2a) one can positivly reduce the detection ranges even with the old warrior like the Mig-21 (although nowhere stealth but still in the right direction) . The ef typhoon and the rafale combine some LO elements aswell interms of their shaping inaddition to extensive RAM treatment therefore they should be much harder to detect by legacy jets . My point was just a rebutal to your claim that there would be no effect of detection ranges.

Sure the situation will become a little trickier for the f16 vs the bison, but I do believe that the falcon came out on top overall vs the bison anyway. Also, is an advantage that makes it a “little trickier” worth spending more than double the amount?? probly be a much better idea to invest in 2 of the MiGs considering the cost difference.

then I guess you belong to a school of thought which prefers 5 MKI’s to every F-22A aswell?? Anyway I am not saying or debating the lethality of the R-73 (it had the west shaking in their pants for some years) however no one has ever dodged even the higher end sidewinders so why would the USAF go for the aim-9x?? Because it is a better missile period!! P-5 and aim-9x l have newer seekers , software and technology greater off boresighting , and LOAL capability (aim-9x to get it shortly if it allready hasnt) something that is very important in short range combat. No one has ever defeated the eagle and viper in a2a why do we replace them?? because we have something better!!!

Do i prefer 5 mki’s to 1 f22A? Not really. the f22A is a good generation or more ahead of the MiG 35, the technologies that come with it are far ahead and hence the cost would be somewhat justified. but what great tech gap is there between an MKIzed MiG35 and Euro canard ? – very very marginal indeed. Does that justify the exhorbitant expense? Clearly not IMHO. So in this case, yes i’d rather get 200+ mig 35s instead of 125 odd Eurocanards and employ more pilots (plenty of good labor in India by the way) and make life miserable for any enemy.
[/QUOTE]

In case of India, the Tejas provides all the LO that they need short of a true stealth design.

Regards,
USS.

What is the cost of the Mig-35 interms of dollars ??? And what about equating that cost to service life , and recalculating by adding the maintainance costs aswell.

I’m not absolutely sure on the cost of the MiG 35, but since it is v.closely related to the MiG 29k, it should be similar – perhaps slightly more. The IN signed a deal for 16 MiG 29ks @ around $ 700 million (including support, training, weapons etc), that makes it to around $ 40-45 mil per a/c, if the order is larger, i’m sure the costs would reduce. However, even if we take the MiG 35 with additional TVC+fancy radar (K has Zhuk-M slotted array), the cost should remain close to $ 45 million a piece. Compare this to EF2000 (well above $ 100 mill mark per unit), Rafale is a little lesser and so is the Hornet (by the way all these latter jets will require completely new infrastructure to be set up in India, what will that do to these already expensive birds???). In terms of maintenance, I think someone (was it pit?)had done a great job on AFM recently regarding maintenance cost differences; even if the russians lag here, the difference between the maintenance cost surely is not enough to offset the almost 2X price tag per unit, not to mention additional infrastructure costs.

…,however LO can be acheived to atleast some level even by including some stores such as has been found in the case of SH with a2a load aswell as EF typhoons with those conformal a2a missile carriage . Although not stealth they still offer a detectability advantage over legacy jets.

What kind of “advantage” are we talking about here in real terms, nobody really knows…sure they have lower RCS, but I dare say with external weapons, that advantage would not be anything to shout about. And did not the MiG guys claim to have reduced the RCS of the bird by 10X??? RAM coatings may not ever substitute for a real stealth design, but then what EURO bird/MRCA contender is a true stealth design. The difference here in terms of detection range would be marginal at best.

Inorder to make something out of this Mig-35 (as you have suggested) you need to fashion so many foreing technologies together onto one jet that we come to speculation on what India would choose interms of french component , Isreili component , indegenous component etc etc therefore lets just compare it with standard russian Components .

Why? India/Russia already have experience in this regard in terms of the Su 30MKI and even to some extent the MiG29. I’m sure they can put it to good use, after all Federov, the same man behind the Su Bureau is now heading MiG.

Is Bars 29 full AESA or even PESA and is it fully ready ?

Even if the Bars 29/Zhuk A or even the Zhuk MFE (which is currently being tested on a MiG 29) is not fully ready, how ready is the AMSAR?? Until the Euro AESA turns up, the Zhuk M is pretty competitive with existing slotted array Captor or even the RBE2. By the time the Euro jets get their fancy AESA, I’m sure the Russians or Israelis can offer something equally good.

How many hours have the smokeless engines clocked ??

How does anyone know, but they are supposed to be on the MiG 29k, which is slated for delivery by mid 2007, so i’m assuming the new engines must be well on their way.

How much integration of avionics is going to be there ???

Lets take the MKI as the model to follow – integration is pretty impressive IMHO. Israeli/Indian/SouthAfrican ECM+French Displays+Russian Radar+Indian MC, not bad eh? IIRC, the MiG 29k in fact has French HMS – Topsight and so do the Malaysian Su 30s.

To what extent has the maintaince come down ?? The real benefit of the Mig-35 lies obviously in its handelling specially at low speeds due to TVC aswell as the fact that the service life of the aircraft has been brought up to 5000 hours however the rafale is doing more (7000 hours I believe ) and the F-16’s are doing 8000 if I’m not wrong.

As pointed out earlier, even with the western birds offereing somewhat better maintenance values, I don’t believe that the maintenance costs difference is going to be anywhere near offsetting the difference in unit prices (almost to the tune of double/triple in some cases).

It still carries the Archer or has a more sophisticated IR missile been planned more in line with the P5 or the aim-9x , what about BVR anything comparable to MICA or Aim-120C7 or meteor???

Yes missile integration is something where some upgrades are required. But the MICA still does not have legs long enough to carry it to the R77 class. And what the hell is wrong with the R73 HMS combo?? I would like to see an a/c dodge an archer, irrespective of fancy ECM. If the MiG radar is israeli, you can bet it will have a Derby/Python combo. The Russians do need to have something to match the Meteor/C7 though ….perhaps some version of the R77 is in the works?
Like I said the Euro birds still (as of today) don’t offer anything really convincing A2A against the MiG 35, esp. not something to justify the extravagant cost.

However to even think about pitting the raptor against the mig-35 in terms of capability is obsurd. the raptor will toast it in BVR with its stealth , better supercruising ability aswell as the weapons system (aim-120C5 with 50% greater range at mach 1.5 so at mach 1.72 it should offer good end game manueverability at close to 40nm and beyond ) . Even if you assume that they get level pegged at BVR THE F-22a wont let the mig-35 get close to him as he has the energy advantage and can stay outside of WVR territory by just using his superior speed.

Admittedly we were discussing a very unlikely, hypothetical situation. The F22/35 are totally in a different class IMHO. in terms of BVR they should easily take care of anything in the skies in the near future. To club them with Euro birds is ridiculous, to the extent that the Mig 35 can’t survive against the F22/35 nor can the Eurocanards. And it will take a lot more than a relatively doubtful LO concept to convince me otherwise.

Regards,
USS.