OT: MiG-35 presentation and first ugraded MiG-29 for Russian Air Force [pics]

[urze]

I don't very much care who do you think is best (I'm a bit anti-Russia IMHO), just as long as no one gets too much power.

 

Back on topic (I know it's my fault), what exactly on the mig-35 is made out of carbon fiber? I clearly see the hydraulic actuator covers are plasic-esque, so is the airbrake since the Mig-29K saw the light of day. What else is composite of that thing that wasn't made out of composites on the vanilla mig-29?

 

I have a very exclusice diagramm that schow all changes that had been made. and after i recust to publisch it, they admitted . unfurtnally i dont know what all the colers stand for, maybe too much wodka as I get it.:holiday: :drunk:

happy orthodox new year!!!

[Guest IguanaKing]

That talk about the F-22 always reminds me about the introduction A-A missiles. About 40 years ago the USAF and USN were so certain about the technological superiority of their F-4 that they didn't even add a gun. In the end the mightiest economic power of the world and strongest military in the west didn't manage a better kill/loss ratio than 2/1 against a small 2nd world country...

 

I can't judge the F-22 because I don't know anything about it. I just know from history that nothing is certain and sometimes things go very different than planned. Now bombard me with fancy terminology and technical flip-flop :)

 

Actually, you are mistaken, the USN never WAS convinced of this, therefore USN F-4s ALWAYS had an internal gun. ;) In A-A combat, as of right now, I can't see much use for stealth in a first shot against an enemy in a low intensity conflict. ROE still limits how much can be done BVR (how's that for fancy terminology ;) ). However, up the intensity to a full-on, gloves-off world war with no VID requirements in ROE, and the F-22 is going to dominate the skies...as much as some would hate to admit it. But, in a low intensity conflict, all one has to do is follow the natural evolution of a fighter aircraft. Sooner or later, if the airframe is any good at all, somebody is going to hang bombs on it...and THAT is where LO technology REALLY begins to shine. BTW...I'd REALLY like to see these kill ratio statistics of which you speak.

 

Force, unfortunately, the arms race is going to advance with or without "traditional superpowers". BTW...speaking again of espionage and what language you'd have to learn to speak...who is the father of stealth technology? Too bad someone didn't pay him more attention, eh?

[Guest IguanaKing]

Does anyone know when the Indian governement is about to decide on the Mig-35? Once it becomes actually an aircraft with and for a customer, it becomes much more interesting and we should get some more info.

 

What would be the alternatives India could look into? The Rafale? Gripen? Some Flanker variant?

 

As for India, think MiG and Su only. India has a long-standing history of buying mostly CIS aircraft, and I don't see that changing anytime soon...especially since India is now so heavily involved in Russia's GLONASS program.

[D-Scythe]

That talk about the F-22 always reminds me about the introduction A-A missiles. About 40 years ago the USAF and USN were so certain about the technological superiority of their F-4 that they didn't even add a gun. In the end the mightiest economic power of the world and strongest military in the west didn't manage a better kill/loss ratio than 2/1 against a small 2nd world country...

 

I can't judge the F-22 because I don't know anything about it. I just know from history that nothing is certain and sometimes things go very different than planned. Now bombard me with fancy terminology and technical flip-flop :)

 

Let's see:

 

Technology back then (1960s)

- Sparrow was never proven to work - in fact, IIRC it was put into production before it even hit anything in tests

 

Technology Now (2000s)

- Stealth is proven to work (F-117)

- AMRAAM is proven to work (F-15/16)

- AESA is proven to work (F-15)

- datalinks are proven to work (F-15/Viggen/Gripen)

- Thrust vectoring/advanced FBW has been proven to work (F-15/Su-3X)

- Super agility has been around for a while (Su-3X)

- HMD/off boresight SRAAMs...also work (Python 4, R-73)

- Really fast speed also works (F-15, SR-71, MiG-25/31)

- Computers/Sensor Fusion...haven't been proven in combat, but the pilots seem to like it

- Stand-off GPS weapons checked (JDAM, SDB, JASSM)

- Chaff/Flares/ECM - nothing new there either

- M61 20 mm cannon - been around for a while too

 

Now that's only the non-new stuff...put it all together, and you still get a pretty unbeatable fighter. Even if we consider the things that are not "new", it still has the best that current proven technology has to offer and just blended it all together in a very expensive package. Yes, nothing is certain, but from the looks of it, the F-22 is prepared for *any* contingency.

[nscode]

However, up the intensity to a full-on, gloves-off world war with no VID requirements in ROE, and the F-22 is going to dominate the skies...as much as some would hate to admit it.

 

in that case nuke SAMs are go and your nice little F-22 is as good as a Cessna... (and so is MiG-35 for that matter)

[Guest IguanaKing]

Yes...that is assuming those on the ground beneath those SAMs don't care about the survival of their civilian populations. ;) BTW...I could only HOPE it would be as good as the Cessna 172 that departed FRG and landed in Red Square without so much as being challenged, after flying through hundreds of miles of the vaunted Soviet air defense net. :D

[nscode]

you've sayed it's a world war... so it's ok to assume that. And A-10s are gonna come after those F-22 anyway and dump their DU, so it's the same...

 

How is it that when a Su flys meters from a US carrier it's "they knew it wasn't gonna attack", but when a cessna does what you've mentioned it's something different. russians at least admited their mistakes (and heads flew..)

[Guest IguanaKing]

OMG, let's not get into the DU discussion in this thread. DU danger is from heavy metal poisoning, NOT from any radiological effect.

 

Between the Cessna in Red Square and the Su over-flying a Navy carrier...the difference is obvious. One, the Matthias Rust incident, took place in 1987, at the very height of the Cold War. The other, the Su over-flight of a US carrier, in a Japanese port, was well after 1991 (the year the USSR ceased to be). So, do I REALLY need to tell you the difference in hostility levels between those two incidents, or can you figure that out on your own? :D

[nscode]

Does it matter? It's a danger.. and there are gonna be many dangers around, so what's the difference in one danger more.

 

...

 

I'm sorry for this OT, Dmitri... I'm very sorry... *All right*, you're sorrier than I am, but I am as sorry as well... I am as sorry as you are, Dmitri! Don't say that you're more sorry than I am, because I'm capable of being just as sorry as you are... So we're both sorry, all right?... All right.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Yes, it matters. DU is no more dangerous than any other heavy metal used in weaponry in a war, and its effects are localized. Neutron radiation, on the other hand, is far more toxic to living things than ANY substance man has ever produced...and it travels for hundreds of miles. So, if Russia wanted to use nukes to defend against conventional attacks...well, I guess that is their prerogative. BTW...need I remind you that another purpose of LO technology is to achieve a strategic goal with a minimum of civilian casualties?

[Trident]

The thing is to keep in mind is that Rust WAS detected before entering Soviet airspace and later escorted by Mi-24s for part of his flight. What caused the heads to roll is that noone seemed able to come to a decision about what course of action to take with this (obviously non-military) intruder. I suppose the outrage over the KAL007 shoot-down only a few years earlier can be blamed for the hesitation to accept resposibility by those in charge.

 

As for India's MRCA competition, there most certainly are Western competitors, namely the Gripen, the F-16E, the F/A-18E and even (now that the Mirage2000-5 is out of production) the Rafale. Reports are conflicting about whether the Eurofighter Typhoon is being offered, but needless to say this has become quite a high-profile competition compared to what was originally intended (more Mirage2000s, to be precise ;) ). To be frank, it has come to the point where purchasing additional batches of Su-30MKIs would seem more sensible. The Rafale and the Super Hornet are overkill and to a certain extent duplicate the existing Flankers in terms of capabilities, not to mention the the price tag. Given the positive zoo of different aircraft types the IAF operates their logistics would definitely improve aswell.

[Guest IguanaKing]

As for India's MRCA competition, there most certainly are Western competitors, namely the Gripen, the F-16E, the F/A-18E and even (now that the Mirage2000-5 is out of production) the Rafale. There are conflicting reports about whether the Eurofighter Typhoon is being offered, but needless to say this has become quite a high-profile competition compared to what was originally intended (more Mirage2000s, to be precise ;) ).

 

Yes, there are competitors, but I don't see the Western competition being taken on...for several reasons. I'd be more than happy to enter a friendly wager with anyone who thinks otherwise. :D

[Kula66]

Actually, you are mistaken, the USN never WAS convinced of this, therefore USN F-4s ALWAYS had an internal gun. ;)

 

 

Actually IK, I don't think thats true ... Just watched Randy Cunningham in a documentary and he clearly states he had no gun when he downed 3 Migs in one sortie, only 4 Aim-9s when flying from the USS Constellation ...

 

BTW, regarding the F-22 debate ... its like comparing a Su-27 v Mig-19 or an F-15 v an F-5. Throw enough low capability a/c at it and you will win eventually OR if the high end figther makes a mistake the other guy wins ... its not invincible, just waaaay ahead until the rest catchup - if we can aford it!

 

The 22 has so many advantages not just stealth - super-cruise from 55k' is such a plus - your AMRAAMs or JDAMs will have mega reach (unlike LO), plus its electronic systems, plus its TVCs, plus raw engine power and TWR, plus the training of its pilots, plus supprt systems! It's just a question of stacking the odds massively in favour of the US.

 

If you want to fight the F-22 just drop a line of 81mm motar shells across the flightline ...

[nscode]

need I remind you that another purpose of LO technology is to achieve a strategic goal with a minimum of civilian casualties?

 

without going further into it, need I not remind you that I, from close expirience, do not belive that.

[tomcat1974]

Nope, this is the cockpit of the Romanian MiG-29(9-12A) prototype called Sniper, that has glass cockpit by Elbit systems. This projetc has not been approved by the MiG compnay hence it's not further developped.

 

 

Bollocks...

We never bother to ask the Eastern Brother if we can update our planes.. We just did it... End result it was considered the Sniper program was not cost effective since Lancer was already in production. Conclusion ... not worth it for some 16 old Mig 29's we had... Mig RSK has nothing to have with it.

[Force_Feedback]

Any details on the Ukrainian Mig-29 upgrades? They will be upgraded domestically, but that's all I heard, no word on what will actually be upgraded. I guess R-27AE integration would be one of them, now that thing (or the seeker to be precise) is in production. But what else?

[MBot]

Actually, you are mistaken, the USN never WAS convinced of this, therefore USN F-4s ALWAYS had an internal gun. ;)

 

Actualy, no USN F-4 version EVER had a internal gun :)

As for the overall A-A kill/loss ratio of the whole vietnam war, it is 2.13/1 according to 'US Navy F-4 Phantom II Mig Killers 1972-73' by Brad Elward and Peter Davies.

 

 

 

Regarding my F-4 analogy. Please all be aware that I am not saying that the the same thing will happen to the F-22. I am sure the F-22 is excellent at what it is designed for. The point I wanted to make with that example is that trust in technology and your own superiority can be dangerous. Your technology might be good at what you designed it for, but you might have to use it in circumstances very different to what you would like to.

The F-4 was considered good enough to be the primary fighter of the US airforces - and failed (for whatever reasons ).

[Stealth_HR]

Yes, it matters. DU is no more dangerous than any other heavy metal used in weaponry in a war, and its effects are localized. Neutron radiation, on the other hand, is far more toxic to living things than ANY substance man has ever produced...and it travels for hundreds of miles.

 

Thank you, finally someone who did their homework on DU being DU just because it's a denser-than-titanium round, not a magical radioactive bullet. :thumbup:

 

So, if Russia wanted to use nukes to defend against conventional attacks...well, I guess that is their prerogative. BTW...need I remind you that another purpose of LO technology is to achieve a strategic goal with a minimum of civilian casualties?

 

There's always EMP projectiles. Provided you can tell your own forces to get the hell out of here or send MiG-3s at them without worrying they'll fry and drop. :music_whistling:

[RvETito]

Bollocks...

We never bother to ask the Eastern Brother if we can update our planes.. We just did it...

 

...and they just cancelled the warranty of your 29's. Simple wordlwide rule- you make a modification of an aircraft on your own, without notifying it's manifacturer and he automaticaly cancels any warranty and service support.

 

End result it was considered the Sniper program was not cost effective since Lancer was already in production. Conclusion ... not worth it for some 16 old Mig 29's we had...

 

And how "young" are your MiG-21MFs Lancers compared to the 29's?;)

[tflash]

As for India's MRCA competition, there most certainly are Western competitors, namely the Gripen, the F-16E, the F/A-18E and even (now that the Mirage2000-5 is out of production) the Rafale. Reports are conflicting about whether the Eurofighter Typhoon is being offered, but needless to say this has become quite a high-profile competition compared to what was originally intended (more Mirage2000s, to be precise ;) ). To be frank, it has come to the point where purchasing additional batches of Su-30MKIs would seem more sensible. The Rafale and the Super Hornet are overkill and to a certain extent duplicate the existing Flankers in terms of capabilities, not to mention the the price tag. Given the positive zoo of different aircraft types the IAF operates their logistics would definitely improve aswell.

 

 

At least someone who has something to say on topic. I admire the in-depth knowledge of many others regarding totally unrelated subjects though. If I want to prepare for a quiz on nature, the future of mankind, the Vietnam war, ecology and the role of the F-22 in all this I will certainly come back to this thread.

 

On our topic unfortunately I only found mostly some rather old information:

 

http://www.defenseindustrydaily.com/2006/03/mirage-2000s-withdrawn-as-indias-mrca-fighter-competition-changes/index.php

 

Also outdated, but the basis of the original MRCA contest:

 

http://www.bharat-rakshak.com/SRR/Volume13/pandey.html

 

I also found a very recent discussion, with some nice pictures of Mig-35 also, some of them already posted here:

 

http://forums.bharat-rakshak.com/viewtopic.php?p=302777&sid=1b1fd1048e7866a9805a8127b5c11e13

 

Something on the Gripen proposal:

 

http://www.india-defence.com/reports/2798

 

Here someone argues why he thinks Superbug is what they need:

 

http://kuku.sawf.org/Articles/2668.aspx

 

 

In my view, we should discuss Mig-35 against Super Hornet - F-16 - Rafale -Gripen and evt. more Su-30.

 

No F-22 on the horizon here and even no F-15.

[Guest IguanaKing]

Actualy, no USN F-4 version EVER had a internal gun :)

As for the overall A-A kill/loss ratio of the whole vietnam war, it is 2.13/1 according to 'US Navy F-4 Phantom II Mig Killers 1972-73' by Brad Elward and Peter Davies.

 

 

 

Regarding my F-4 analogy. Please all be aware that I am not saying that the the same thing will happen to the F-22. I am sure the F-22 is excellent at what it is designed for. The point I wanted to make with that example is that trust in technology and your own superiority can be dangerous. Your technology might be good at what you designed it for, but you might have to use it in circumstances very different to what you would like to.

The F-4 was considered good enough to be the primary fighter of the US airforces - and failed (for whatever reasons ).

 

Heh...I guess my memory is a little faulty on that subject. :doh: Thanks for the correction, and thanks also to Kula66. :D

[GGTharos]

without going further into it, need I not remind you that I, from close expirience, do not belive that.

 

Without going -too- much further into it, the alternative is probably a carpet bombing?

[tomcat1974]

...and they just cancelled the warranty of your 29's. Simple wordlwide rule- you make a modification of an aircraft on your own, without notifying it's manifacturer and he automaticaly cancels any warranty and service support.

And how "young" are your MiG-21MFs Lancers compared to the 29's?;)

 

There was no warranty in those old Mig 29. No warranty cover 12 years. All modifications where on our own.

 

Lancers airframe where the newest ones we received. They where barely flown in the 80's. Ceausescu's idea of fuel economy (10h per year).

[RvETito]

The point is that the manifacturer has the right to deny any responsibility for the aircraft's service. And your autorities have been aware of that and obviously they have taken the chance.

 

There's nothing wrong in making your own plans for modernisations, actualy I find it more reasonable. The question is whether you would be able to maintain the fleet without the support of it's manifacturer. My country is not and we have no choice but the RSK MiG as the only authorised institution in MiG-29 production, modernisation and overhaul.

[nscode]

Without going -too- much further into it, the alternative is probably a carpet bombing?

 

 

It's not an alternative, it's still used alongside when precision is just too expensive.. I watched it 3 times in '99.