MiG-35 and MiG-29SMT presentation

[Vekkinho]

Um ... Vekkinho ... what IS that source?

It's nice that you found it, but where the heck did it come from? :P

 

Ask Pilotasso, he uploaded this book in .pdf

 

I can find direct link later, I'm not home right now and this comp I'm using at the moment doesn't have that link to Pilotasso's thread where it can be found.

 

It's just one of the sources on R-27T i've found. The main reason those missiles aren't used often IRL is explained by Pilotasso:

About the T, when I fly Mig 29 I get LA for the R-73 soon after I get for the T, and I imagine IRL their ranges arent that different either.

 

plus the fact that Alamo B is much heavier than 73s and creates more drag.

 

Tactics of BVR with 9-12 was to deny target's offensive by launching Alamos. These missiles are not supposed to hit the target but to force it defensive. Once the target does that MiG pilot is already within visual and target is engaged with Archers.

 

You can also see provision for UB-16, UB-32 rocket launchers and UPK-23 gun pods (inner pylons only) and that's again something we didn't have with default MEInit.

[tflash]

So, here a little shortlist based on "Mig Evolution" Airforces Monthly, januari issue 2007, pp. 14 onwards. It is an article to which RAC Mig contributed.

Seamsto me there are practically as much variants as aircraft!

 

Mig 29 "variant A" (9-12A)

Mig 29 "variant B" (9-12B)

Mig-29UB (9-51)

Mig-29 (9-13) increased fuel / Gardenia / Peru

Mig-29 (9-14) multirole prototype

Mig-29M (9-15) OLS-M optronic / R-77

Mig-29K (9-31) Russian Navy proposal

Mig-29S (9-13S) N019M / R-77 / R-27ET 16 RAF rest converted to SE

Mig-29SE (9-13SE) N-019ME Peru / Sudan / Eritrea

Mig-29SD (9-12SD) Malaysia (Mig-29N) refuel probe / IFF / RVV-AE

Mig-29SM (9-13SM) TV-guided PGM support (Kh-29T), no customers

Mig-29SM New proposal no customers, comparable to Mig-29BM

Mig-29SMT (9-17) Zhuk-ME / Yemen / Algeria / Eritrea

Mig-29UBT (9-52) Mult-role Osa Phased Array - suspended

Mig-29SMT (9-18 and 9-19)

Mig-29UBT (9-53)

Mig-29BM (9-11) Belarus N019P / LCD / RVV-AE Kh-29T / Kh-31 A/P

Mig-29AS Slovak airforce, NATO/ICAO compliant

Mig-29UBS Slovak airforce, NATO/ICAO compliant

Mig-29M-OVT (No. 156) Mig-29M with TVC

Mig-29M2 (No. 154) Twin seat testbed for Mig-29K and Mig-35 programmes

Mig-29K (9-41) Indian Navy

Mig-29KUB (9-47) Indian Navy twin seat

Mig-35 (9-61 and 9-67) Indian MRCA proposals

[Kusch]

MiG-35 movie:

 

http://www.aviapedia.com/video/mig-35-video-first-official-presentation

 

 

[Force_Feedback]

And, you can just put your foot on the K-36, with the ACES II the life support package will crack, everything will start decomposing inside, not really pretty.

 

Look really cool, lets hope the MFI plane will have even more of the mig-35 innovations (and that it will be a really new airframe)

[Pilotasso]

http://www.patricksaviation.com/videos/DarkPromise/1546/

http://www.aviapedia.com/videos/fighters/Mig-35/MiG-35-Lukhovitsy.wmv

 

EDIT: shucks, kush beat me to it :D

[RvETito]

Damn, this aircraft has so much potential. It would be shame if it doesn't go serial at least for export. This and the T-10S are the only a/c design that completely fit the term multirole.

[Pilotasso]

I can see India buy it. They were looking for 130 more 29's but I think if they go to 35's they will have technical and logistical advantages because of the MKI.

[RvETito]

Yeah but there's no much info about the indian 29K's. I mean what will be their equipement- avionics, weapons, engines(TVC or no?) and so on and so for. Sure they will differ from the first MiG-29K protorypes but I'm ineterested to learn more about their capabilities.

[Alfa]

I can see India buy it. They were looking for 130 more 29's but I think if they go to 35's they will have technical and logistical advantages because of the MKI.

 

I can see that too Pilotasso - not due to logistical advatages in connection with the Su-30MKI(very different aircraft), but rather with the MiG-29K. The MiG-29M(and also that MiG-35 version of it) is very similar to the MiG-29K since they are built on the same basis and employ a common system package. Ok I realise that the tender in question concerns the Indian airforce and not the navy, but surely there should be basis for a "cross branch" support & maintenance structure.

 

- JJ.

[Alfa]

Yeah but there's no much info about the indian 29K's. I mean what will be their equipement- avionics, weapons, engines(TVC or no?) and so on and so for. Sure they will differ from the first MiG-29K protorypes but I'm ineterested to learn more about their capabilities.

 

Here is something for you Tito:

 

http://www.migavia.ru/eng/news/?id=18&tid=4

 

...it is an official MIG article on the MiG-29K and includes some information on the 9-41 and what systems it will have. Just like with the Su-30MKI, these include some of Indian, French and Israeli origin :)

 

Cheers,

- JJ.

[Kusch]

http://www.oborona.ru/photochronicle/album?id=3006651&udf0=3006651

 

Plane version L370 Witebsk?

[RvETito]

This looks like a pretty bad boy...

 

Now we can take a closer look to those things on the engine nacelles. Still have no idea what are they for... May be some kind of nav-targeting system like the LANTIRN?

[Pilotasso]

One thing that troubles me: Everybody wants to keep their AESA radars as much secretive as possible but the russians are very keen to show theirs to everyone who wants to see it. Any thoughts on that?

[GGTharos]

I think Pilotasso that the word of the day is 'integration' ... I don't think AESA itself is a huge secret - how you use it might be. For example the 'non secret' version might merely function as a radar ... whereas we know it can do so much more with the right hardware structure and the right software.

[RvETito]

For commercial purpose I guess. No wonder they advertise it so much since this(and not only) aircraft is meant for export. Strange thing- they export technology they don't even plan to have in ther own Air Forces. Busine$$ is busine$$...

[Kula66]

About the T, when I fly Mig 29 I get LA for the R-73 soon after I get for the T, and I imagine IRL their ranges arent that different either.

 

I'm surprised ... given the difference in size of the rocket motors I would think the T and ET would have a much greater range IRL!

[Pilotasso]

I mean, between the 73 and T

[RvETito]

I'm surprised ... given the difference in size of the rocket motors I would think the T and ET would have a much greater range IRL!

 

The IR versions of the R-27 have the same solid propelant rocket motor as the SARH versions. It's the seeker that limits it's range.

[GGTharos]

I'm surprised ... given the difference in size of the rocket motors I would think the T and ET would have a much greater range IRL!

 

And you WILL see the difference in a tail-on launch ;)

 

Also, realistically speaking, even in a head-on shot, if the shot is long enough to exhaust the 73's rocket ... the 27T will arrive with more energy.

 

I think for missiles of relatively similar mass, you can expect similar range performance actually, if their propellant mass to launch mass ratio is similar.

[Alfa]

I'm surprised ... given the difference in size of the rocket motors I would think the T and ET would have a much greater range IRL!

 

In head-on the seeker acquistion range is the limitation - and the seekerheads of the R-73 and R-27T/TE are similar.

 

In tail aspect where the limitation is the missile motor energy, there would be a considerable range difference between the small R-73 and the R-27T not to mention -TE......and that is the whole point to the IR versions of the R-27 :) .

[GGTharos]

In head-on the seeker acquistion range is the limitation - and the seekerheads of the R-73 and R-27T/TE are similar.

 

The same, actually, IIRC. Mk80 seeker, though I think it is modified for use on the 27 (perhaps structural mountings and such, or even coolant)

[Kusch]

MiG press release

 

 

"...A revolutionary feature of the MiG-35 is the integration of the most advanced optic-electronic sighting and targeting systems. The developers utilized unique technologies from the Russian space program when creating these systems. The MiG-35 is equipped with in-built multi-channel surveying-and-sighting optic-electronic system which has an extended range. The multi-channel optic-electronic station to be fitted to the aircraft in a pod allows for round-the-clock navigation, detection, sighting and reconnaissance.

 

The MiG-35 self-defense system includes the most up-to-date radio and optical devices ensuring timely detection and counteraction of enemy fighters and air defense. "

[GGTharos]

Maybe they haven't heard of LANTIRN :D

[Trident]

Oh, but apart from being a decent achievement for the Russian industry this new system does not waste any hardpoints ;)

 

The new MiG is shaping up very nicely indeed. The only trouble I can see is weight growth and perhaps drag with all those gadgets aboard. RSK MiG is definitely back, didn't look like it just a few years ago.

[GGTharos]

It is quite a nice piece of hardware. As for the drag/whatever ... that's pretty typical when you do major upgrades based on an old airframe.