First serial produced Mig-35's delivered

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: 3347
  • Joined: 20 Mar 2010, 10:26
  • Location: Parts Unknown
  • Warnings: 2

Unread post18 Jun 2019, 15:38

More at the jump..

https://militarywatchmagazine.com/artic ... -to-follow

As an F-35 counter, this is rather feeble. But against our legacy fighters it can't be under-estimated. They have some interesting systems, very high thrust to weight ratios, AESA radars and other advancements. The one thing they don't have (from other reports) is thrust vectoring. This is however, available as an option to anyone ordering Mig-35's.

That's an interesting departure, especially given their stated MO: Closing to the merge and winning the WVR fight. Just two squadrons initially, with options for follow on orders. I really doubt the Russians will buy more though. While very capable, the SU-30SM and SU-35 handily outperform it in most metrics. This is a showpiece in Russian service, for foreign operators of the Mig-29 to take note.

I find this analogous to us producing F-15EX's if it comes to that. Fun to see such successful fighters tricked up and capable of new things, but ultimately futile when the US could be building more F-35's. With no light stealth fighter to speak of, Russia's only option is more Mig-35's..
Offline
User avatar

marsavian

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1208
  • Joined: 02 Feb 2018, 21:55

Unread post18 Jun 2019, 15:43

AESA is not standard, neither is TVC, and had only been prototyped. Mig-35 is an incremental advance on Mig-29 as it stands now.

p.s. militarywatchmagazine is a Kremlin mouthpiece so verify information coming from them.
Offline

vilters

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1080
  • Joined: 28 Sep 2009, 00:16

Unread post18 Jun 2019, 19:28

TVC is fir airshows, not for combat.
On the contrary, it increases weight and maintenance and decreases Main Time Between Failures.

So let us all shout : Add the TVC, Add the TVC, so we have fewer combat ready Mig-35 to worry about. LOL.
Offline

charlielima223

Elite 1K

Elite 1K

  • Posts: 1017
  • Joined: 12 Jan 2014, 19:26

Unread post19 Jun 2019, 03:02

vilters wrote:TVC is fir airshows, not for combat.
On the contrary, it increases weight and maintenance and decreases Main Time Between Failures.


We don't seem to have a problem with thrust vector on the F-22... whats the difference between ours (US) and their (Russia)?
Offline

firebase99

Enthusiast

Enthusiast

  • Posts: 81
  • Joined: 03 May 2017, 21:47

Unread post28 Jun 2019, 04:50

vilters wrote:TVC is fir airshows, not for combat.
On the contrary, it increases weight and maintenance and decreases Main Time Between Failures.

So let us all shout : Add the TVC, Add the TVC, so we have fewer combat ready Mig-35 to worry about. LOL.


IIRC, the TVC on the Raptor was designed in for its Super Cruise at 60K feet +....not REALLY for turnin' and burnin'.
Offline

hornetfinn

Elite 2K

Elite 2K

  • Posts: 2787
  • Joined: 13 Mar 2013, 08:31
  • Location: Finland

Unread post28 Jun 2019, 07:14

marsavian wrote:AESA is not standard, neither is TVC, and had only been prototyped. Mig-35 is an incremental advance on Mig-29 as it stands now.


That's true. Current MiG-35 is roughly equal to F/A-18C or F-16 Block 50 when it comes to avionics capabilities. Those became operational 25 years ago or so. Of course they are pretty nice improvement over current MiG-29s, but come very late to game. At least they need those AESA radars as a lot of Western and Chinese fighters have AESAs or are getting them soon.
Offline

knowan

Active Member

Active Member

  • Posts: 241
  • Joined: 24 Jul 2018, 10:39

Unread post28 Jun 2019, 14:41

The MiG-35 is essentially just a renamed MiG-29K for the Russian Air Force.
Offline

swiss

Senior member

Senior member

  • Posts: 413
  • Joined: 10 Jan 2017, 14:43

Unread post29 Jun 2019, 18:10

firebase99 wrote:
vilters wrote:TVC is fir airshows, not for combat.
On the contrary, it increases weight and maintenance and decreases Main Time Between Failures.

So let us all shout : Add the TVC, Add the TVC, so we have fewer combat ready Mig-35 to worry about. LOL.


IIRC, the TVC on the Raptor was designed in for its Super Cruise at 60K feet +....not REALLY for turnin' and burnin'.


The "pedals" from the Engines are like additional rudders, and helps to maneuver in thin air.

Scorpion1alpha wrote:Like some already mentioned, TV enhances the F-22’s maneuvering performance at high speeds and high altitudes where the thin air (the regime the Raptor routinely operates at) renders control surfaces less effective. The F-22’s pedals can be considered two additional control surfaces; that and along with its other design features allows it to maneuver around up there like a slick F-16 at 20K. Get any other fighter up there with the F-22 and they'll struggle mightily.


hornetfinn wrote:That's true. Current MiG-35 is roughly equal to F/A-18C or F-16 Block 50 when it comes to avionics capabilities. Those became operational 25 years ago or so. Of course they are pretty nice improvement over current MiG-29s, but come very late to game. At least they need those AESA radars as a lot of Western and Chinese fighters have AESAs or are getting them soon.


The Mig-35 have to wait for an AESA at least to 2021. And the performance is not very impressive.


https://www.janes.com/article/84713/pha ... Ug57_8O4Sk

Return to Modern Military Aircraft

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 11 guests