Russia's Mig-35

Military aircraft - Post cold war aircraft, including for example B-2, Gripen, F-18E/F Super Hornet, Rafale, and Typhoon.
  • Author
  • Message
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3489
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post16 Jan 2017, 19:49

Does anyone know if Russia is "firm" in it's purchase of Mig-35's?

Is a real interesting variant. Supposedly their first AESA, thrust vectoring, glass cockpit and a lot more internal fuel..
Online

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2331
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post16 Jan 2017, 20:05

Don't confuse MiG-35 with the MiG-35OVT demonstator
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3489
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post17 Jan 2017, 14:09

I'm not

So what's the deal with the Mig-35? I read where Egypt has 50 on order??
Offline

pron

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014, 19:28

Unread post27 Jan 2017, 21:08

MiG-35 Demo is Both Product Debut and Contrast of Russian and Western Doctrine in the F-35 Era.

In a widely publicized event on Thursday, Jan. 26, 2017 the Mikoyan-Gurevich Design Bureau (MiG) parented by United Aircraft Corporation officially demonstrated the new MiG-35 to the Russian government. A subsequent demonstration for export customers was carried out today Jan. 27.

The aircraft uses two impressive Klimov RD-33OVT engines fitted with bi-directional thrust vectoring nozzles.

https://theaviationist.com/2017/01/27/n ... gn-market/
Offline
User avatar

popcorn

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 7706
  • Joined: 24 Sep 2008, 08:55

Unread post27 Jan 2017, 23:56

Should dominate the air show circuit.
"When a fifth-generation fighter meets a fourth-generation fighter—the [latter] dies,”
CSAF Gen. Mark Welsh
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1070
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 06:32

popcorn wrote:Should dominate the air show circuit.


... and nowhere else it would seem.
After reading TheAviationist bit it sounds more like (with the exception of its TVC) its trying to catch up to the F-16C Block 50 or F-15E.
Offline

pron

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 110
  • Joined: 21 Jul 2014, 19:28

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 10:41

More about performance, sensors for the Mig-35 here. And maybe some hot-air to....

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php ... nsors.html
Offline

mixelflick

Elite 3K

Elite 3K

  • Posts: 3489
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 17:22

The extent to which they're modernizing with gen 4++ type aircraft (vs. 5th gen) is telling IMO. The Russian air force is making a small buy (37)? Mig-35's surely to lead by example for the export market.

So the Russian air force now has..

100 or so SU-30SM's?
100 or so SU-35's (eventually)
37 Mig 35's
12 PAK FA (on order)
XXX # of Mig 29's
XXX # of SU-27's

Yes, I'm aware they also have Mig-31's, SU-24's/SU-34's etc but strictly speaking, around 200 - 250 "modern" fighters? Mig as a design burea really needs to get moving on the 5th or 6th gen technologies. They've all but been surpassed by Sukhoi and their larger, more capable Flanker series. I consider the PAK-FA an evolution of the Flanker. Not sure if that's appropriate but the more I learn about it, the more it looks like someone stepped on a Flanker..
Online

madrat

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2331
  • Joined: 03 Mar 2010, 03:12

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 19:29

pron wrote:More about performance, sensors for the Mig-35 here. And maybe some hot-air to....

http://www.airrecognition.com/index.php ... nsors.html


Kind of goes hand in hand with all Russian equipment. Hot air, that is. MiG-35 is fleshing out with the same technologies as Su-35S. Some people lose their minds when you mention Su-35S being behind the competition.
Offline

collimatrix

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 159
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2016, 15:27

Unread post28 Jan 2017, 20:14

I'm honestly not sure why anyone would want to buy the MiG-35.

Let's take it for granted that, for political reasons, anyone who might consider buying the MiG-35 would not consider buying anything from the USA, Sweden, France or the Eurofighter consortium.

Why would they want MiG-35 over SU-35?

In the 1990s and 2000s Flankers of various sorts sold a lot more briskly than Fulcrums did. The purchase price was significantly higher, but the long-term operating costs were very similar. In the long run, for not that much more cash, Sukhoi could give you a whole lot more airplane.

The Fulcrum had somewhat better agility. The Flanker had waayyyyyyy more range and waayyyyyyy more payload and waayyyyyyy better sensors (even the IRST was better). I don't see how that equation has changed.

Maybe if the choice were between MiG-35 and FC-1 the MiG-35 would be attractive, but if MiG-35 is on the table, surely SU-35 is as well.
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1099
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post29 Jan 2017, 00:08

Nothing to worry about.
Just click "refresh" when they start buying more fuel to fly, then Wodka to drink. :devil:
Offline

arian

Banned

  • Posts: 1293
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 09:25

Unread post29 Jan 2017, 00:28

collimatrix wrote:Why would they want MiG-35 over SU-35?


Because Su-35 is way behind technologically. It has no real multi-role capability, it has a radar that is 20 years out of date etc. Of course Sukhoi can remedy that, but given that it took them 10 years to get a MiG-29 upgrade in the guise of the MiG-35, and only 20 years to get the Su-35...chances of upgrading quickly enough to be relevant may be slim.

I just love how Russia just adds another + at the end of any generation whenever they make a new upgrade. Now w'ere up to "4++" generation.

Why? Because it has a targeting pod and an AESA radar which offers technology found on just about every other 4th gen plane from 10 years ago. It's more like "4--"
Offline
User avatar

XanderCrews

Elite 5K

Elite 5K

  • Posts: 6019
  • Joined: 16 Oct 2012, 19:42

Unread post29 Jan 2017, 00:51

Wow so that took 10 years huh?
Choose Crews
Offline

collimatrix

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 159
  • Joined: 10 Jul 2016, 15:27

Unread post29 Jan 2017, 02:55

arian wrote:
collimatrix wrote:Why would they want MiG-35 over SU-35?


Because Su-35 is way behind technologically. It has no real multi-role capability, it has a radar that is 20 years out of date etc. Of course Sukhoi can remedy that, but given that it took them 10 years to get a MiG-29 upgrade in the guise of the MiG-35, and only 20 years to get the Su-35...chances of upgrading quickly enough to be relevant may be slim.

I just love how Russia just adds another + at the end of any generation whenever they make a new upgrade. Now w'ere up to "4++" generation.

Why? Because it has a targeting pod and an AESA radar which offers technology found on just about every other 4th gen plane from 10 years ago. It's more like "4--"


But it's not like the assembly lines for MiG-35 are belching smoke and making noise. AESA and a targeting pod for the SU-35 is not far off and have been shown off at air shows. The main issue is that nobody is throwing money at it right now.

If someone wants Russian fighters and they have cash to flash, they're not going to get a MiG-35 with whizzbang toys much faster than they could get an SU-35 with whizzbang toys, it will be much more capable, and long-term its cost is similar. Worse still, PAK-FA is what, maybe a decade off for export customers at this point, at the most? I'm certainly not arguing that anyone would pick PAK-FA over F-35 if given the choice. However, given the choice of Russian fighter aircraft, PAK-FA is definitely more attractive than SU-35, and SU-35 (with modest modernization) is more attractive than MiG-35.

Obviously, if you have a choice between American stuff and Russian stuff there's no contest. But if American stuff isn't on the table, why would you ever pick MiG's current offering?

MiG-29 was one of the weakest of the 4th generation fighters. Its biggest advantage, back in the late 1980s, was good WVR performance thanks to the unparalleled R-73/HMS combination and a high thrust to weight ratio. But now everyone has HOBS missiles that are better than R-73, and the modernization has eaten into the thrust to weight quite a bit. The underlying Fulcrum airframe is mediocre. It's aerodynamically stable fergawdsake! Flankers at least have giant gas bags and twelve weapons stations.

Bottom line, if MiG wants export orders, they're going to have to do better than this. The Russian MOD might keep MiG on life support with a pity order, but everyone else will want Sukhois, just like the past twenty years.

"SU-35," as I understand it, is a bit of a recycled designation. The SU-35s flying over Syria right now aren't really the same SU-35s shown off in the late 1990s/early 2000s. The "SU-35" first shown off was a re-named SU-27M, and was essentially a stock Flanker with new avionics. The current SU-35 has significant structural renovations in addition to the new avionics. So, while the development was rather prolonged (mainly due to lack of $$$), it wasn't quite so bad as the 20+ years that the reuse of the designation would suggest.
Offline

arian

Banned

  • Posts: 1293
  • Joined: 23 Dec 2014, 09:25

Unread post29 Jan 2017, 07:39

collimatrix wrote:Bottom line, if MiG wants export orders, they're going to have to do better than this.


Of course. That is true. But who buys what is to some degree determined by politics (ie bribes) in nations which buy stuff for the fun of buying stuff (ie Arab countries)

collimatrix wrote:"SU-35," as I understand it, is a bit of a recycled designation. The SU-35s flying over Syria right now aren't really the same SU-35s shown off in the late 1990s/early 2000s. The "SU-35" first shown off was a re-named SU-27M, and was essentially a stock Flanker with new avionics. The current SU-35 has significant structural renovations in addition to the new avionics. So, while the development was rather prolonged (mainly due to lack of $$$), it wasn't quite so bad as the 20+ years that the reuse of the designation would suggest.


The Su-35, like the MiG-35 and Su-30 etc is the end result of a series of failed projects going back to the late 80s/early 90s. And it's still just an Su-27 with a new PESA radar (which took about 10 years to develop and give capability of US radars from the early 90s).

I'm not sure we can say it's a different thing from the late 80s Su-27M and other incarnations of the Su-35. They were trying to do the same thing in all these projects but either lacked the technology until now or lacked the customers.

In any case none of these are new aircraft just modest upgrades (by modern standards) of existing designs.

I see your point though as to why someone would bu a MiG-35 over an Su-35. My guess is price: Su-35 is probably a lot more expensive, plus in its current guise it is still inferior to the MiG-35 in multi-role capability. I don't see what ground-attack capability Su-35 has over even vanilla Su-27s.
Next

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: madrat, MSN [Bot] and 16 guests