MiG-35 and MiG-29SMT presentation

[Maximus_G]

May be some kind of nav-targeting system like the LANTIRN?

 

Yep. Chizh approves it's an optical targeting system, visually similar to traditional EOS.

[Maximus_G]

May be some kind of nav-targeting system like the LANTIRN?

 

Yep. Chizh approves it's an optical targeting system, visually similar to traditional EOS.

 

This information has been refuted. Optical targeting sys is hidden under the left engine nacelle, and under the right one there is something different.

[Alfa]

This information has been refuted. Optical targeting sys is hidden under the left engine nacelle, and under the right one there is something different.

 

Hmm, could it be that the one on the right engine duct is a "low mounted" EOS specifically for TV guided A/G munitions, while the one on the left is a seperate laser designator for LGBs?

[Maximus_G]

They say, that thing under the right engine nacelle is a part if an incoming missile detecting system.

[RvETito]

Hmm, could it be that the one on the right engine duct is a "low mounted" EOS specifically for TV guided A/G munitions, while the one on the left is a seperate laser designator for LGBs?

 

I read in another forum too- that this is 360' lower hemisphere EOS with night chanel.

[Kusch]

[Alfa]

Arrgh too blurry Kusch :D . But even so it is evident that your were right about the Zhuk-AE installed in the MiG-35 being a smaller version than the display version I found....and I also think I know why ;) - the mass is 220 kg, which corresponds exactly to that of the Zhuk-M with planar slotted array, so by "down sizing" the AESA set to reach the same weight, the two types will be directly interchangable without upsetting the balance of the aircraft.

 

Anyway, these are the specs I can "extract" from the blurry image:

 

Mass: 220 kg

 

Input power AC (kVA): 9

Input power DC (kW): 1,0

Cooling: liquid and air

 

Frequency band: X

 

Antenna

 

Type: APAA

Diameter (mm): 575

Gain (dB): 34

Built-in guard channel

 

Angle of movements(degrees):

 

- In azimuth and elevation: +/- 60 (?)

- Scan zones: [+/- 10], [+/- 30], [+/- 60]....(this part could be totally wrong - I cannot make out the figures)

 

- Number of recievers: 3

- Noise factor(dB): 3

- Pulse power(W): =/> 3400

 

Target detection range for targets of RCS=3m2 in air-to-air modes(km):

 

Look-up

- Head-on aspect: 130

- Tail-on aspect: 50

 

Look-down

- Head-on aspect: 130

- Tail-on aspect: 40

 

Target detection range in air-to-surface modes(km):

 

- destroyer: 200

- missile boat: 100

- railway bridge: 120

- group of moving tanks: 30

 

Azimuth and range resolutions(m):

 

- low resolution(R=80 km): 300 x 300

- medium resolution(R=60 km): 30 x 30

- high resolution(R=20 km): 3 x 3

- super high resolution(R=20 km): 1 x 1

 

But especially the numbers for antenna scan limits and scan zones are difficult to see on the image - e.g. "0" looks like a "9" or "5"...or.. :D .

 

BTW - note that this time around there can be no doubt as to the meaning of what the radar provides for the different missiles:

 

Target designation, target illumination and missile correction for the R-27R1(R1E), RVV-AE missiles, target designation data for the R-73E, Kh-31A, Kh-35 and R-27T(TE) missiles.

:) .

[nscode]

Yeah... it seams as if they've heard us :D

[Pilotasso]

No, it only means the missiles are not uncaged. :D

[Anytime]

Wohaa that detection range for a 3m2 target in look down/up is pretty poor?

[GGTharos]

In tail-on aspect? That is expected.

[Anytime]

No head on, thought that would be the detection range for a 1m2 tgt.

 

In tail-on aspect? That is expected.

[GGTharos]

Why would you think that though? :) Radar advances seem fairly linear in range - it's usability that's leaps and bounds ahead :)

[Pilotasso]

It is, with subtle differences, like the Su-27 to the 30. Major changes are under the skin. Russians are keen to cahnge designation numbers when the west does by changing sufix letter F-18C/E/F etc. It gives the imoression of a completely new plane... not quite.

[Alfa]

No head on, thought that would be the detection range for a 1m2 tgt.

 

Like GG I don't understand why you would think that? :)

 

Radar power essentially remains a question of power output/antenna area. If you look at the specs for the Zhuk-AE set, you can see that it has an antenna of only ~570 mm(not entirely sure about the last digit there due to the blurry nature of the photo) and apparently a peak output of some 3,4 kW.....in which case a detection range of some 130 km against a target of 3m2 is quite good.

 

For comparison the Zhuk-M slotted array version has an antenna of 624 mm and peak output of 6 kW - i.e. a larger antenna and more powerful emitter, but is stated to have exactly the same range performance against a similar target size.

 

I believe it would be possible to install a larger version of the Zhuk-AE in the MiG-29 as far as room is concerned, but phased array radars tend to be heavier than slotted array ones, so I believe the reason for the "down-sizing" is due to what I mentioned earlier - namely to make its mass correspond exactly to that of the Zhuk-M slotted array that the MiG-29M2(basis for the MiG-35) was "built around".

 

Anyway, I agree with GG that the advances of the Zhuk-AE(and any AESA set for that matter) has more to do with functionality/versatility than increase of radar power....which, given the basics of a radar, at the end of the day is going to be limited by physical constraints of the carrying platform :) .

[Alfa]

The Mig 35 looks like a Mig 29 to me...

 

It is - well it is basically an up-tech'ed MiG-29M.

[Alfa]

It is, with subtle differences, like the Su-27 to the 30. Major changes are under the skin. Russians are keen to cahnge designation numbers when the west does by changing sufix letter F-18C/E/F etc. It gives the imoression of a completely new plane... not quite.

 

Not quite Pilotasso - well the name change from MiG-29M2 to "MiG-35" might indeed be considered that way. BUT....the changes from "baseline" MiG-29(9-12, 9-13) to MiG-29M are all but subtle and the added "M" actually covers far more changes than e.g. from F-18A to F-18C :) .

 

If you study the airframe of the MiG-29M/MiG-29K closely, you will see that there are MAJOR changes as compared with the MiG-29 airframe(some of which aren't immedeatly noticable - e.g. different dimensions)....so many in fact that the M and K are to be considered entirely new types although superficially resembling the baseline MiG-29.

 

But you are right that there is even more "under the skin" :)

[MBot]

It is, with subtle differences, like the Su-27 to the 30. Major changes are under the skin. Russians are keen to cahnge designation numbers when the west does by changing sufix letter F-18C/E/F etc. It gives the imoression of a completely new plane... not quite.

 

After about thousend versions with such great names as M, SM, SMT, SMT, M2, ZHE, HDE, NDG2Y, XYZ, it was about time to get a new name :) Makes life easier...

[Anytime]

Sorry had it confused with anohter radar where Janes had reported 80nm detection range for a 0.02m2 or 0.08m2 tgt. Thought it was the mig-35 must have been the SU-30.

 

 

Not quite Pilotasso - well the name change from MiG-29M2 to "MiG-35" might indeed be considered that way. BUT....the changes from "baseline" MiG-29(9-12, 9-13) to MiG-29M are all but subtle and the added "M" actually covers far more changes than e.g. from F-18A to F-18C :) .

 

If you study the airframe of the MiG-29M/MiG-29K closely, you will see that there are MAJOR changes as compared with the MiG-29 airframe(some of which aren't immedeatly noticable - e.g. different dimensions)....so many in fact that the M and K are to be considered entirely new types although superficially resembling the baseline MiG-29.

 

But you are right that there is even more "under the skin" :)

[Kusch]

http://www.avia.ru/cgi/news/news.cgi?action=geten&id=1171446328

 

And before;

 

http://www.financialexpress.com/latest_full_story.php?content_id=152093

 

 

The winner is... ;)

[GGTharos]

Sorry had it confused with anohter radar where Janes had reported 80nm detection range for a 0.02m2 or 0.08m2 tgt. Thought it was the mig-35 must have been the SU-30.

 

Sounds pretty fictional.

[RvETito]

http://aeroindia.org/taxonomy/term/6?page=1

 

29 pages with all kind of photos- MiG-35, MiG-29OVT, Su-30MKI, F/A-18E/F, F-16C, radars, weapons etc... all fresh from the last week.

[Anytime]

I"ll see if I can find the article on the web if not I'll scan it.

 

Speaking of fictional, :book: I've been tralling the web for RCS info and obviously there's not much info around, however F-16.net had a thread with some interesting numbers with a semi crediable source. I have no idea how accurate they are but it would be interesting comparing the theoretical detection ranges for radars modeled in Lockon with the RCS values below. Might crunch the numbers this weekend.

 

=============================================

http://www.f-16.net/f-16_forum_viewtopic-t-3018-start-30.html

 

You're right. However, if both aircraft have AWACS and GCI control help, none will be able to surprise the other thanks to its lower RCS.

 

WAP, 1999, a special report for EF-2000.

 

A: According to the information I know, the modern AWACSs today like E-2C Hawkeye 2000 and E-3C are capable to the detect the target of RCS = 1m2 class 250~300 km away.

 

And their maximal effective detection range to the fighters in the world should be:

F-15C & Su-27 (RCS = 10~15m2): 450 ~ 600 km

Tornado (RCS = 8 m2): 420 ~ 500 km

MIG-29 (RCS = 5 m2): 370 ~ 450 km

F/A-18C (RCS = 3 m2): 330 ~ 395 km

F-16C (RCS = 1.2 m2): 260 ~ 310 km

JAS39 (RCS = 0.5 m2): 210 ~ 250 km

Su-47 (RCS = 0.3 m2): 185 ~ 220 km

Rafale (RCS = 0.1~0.2 m2): 140 ~ 200 km

F-18E (RCS = 0.1 m2): 140 ~ 170 km

MIG-42 (RCS = 0.1 m2): 140 ~ 170 km

EF2K (RCS = 0.05~0.1 m2): 120 ~ 170 km

F-35A (RCS = 0.0015 m2): 50 ~ 60 km

F/A-22 (RCS < or = 0.0002~0.0005 m2): < or = 30 ~ 45 km

Even the tradional fighters (F-15, F-16) have the modern AWACS on their side, the stealthy fighter like F/A-22 with AIM-120 is still capable to give them the big surprise.

 

As for the low RCS NG fighters like EF-2000, MIG-42, and Rafale, if they are equipped with the NG BVRAAM like Meteor (Effective range: 90~100 km+ to the 9G maneuverable fighter, and 150~200 km+ to the big, slow and clumsy airplanes like AWACS...) and R-77M-PD (Maximal effective range: 160 km+), I think they also have certain amount of chance to give tradional fighters + modern AWACS today a surprise....

 

==============================================

 

Sounds pretty fictional.

[RvETito]

As for the low RCS NG fighters like EF-2000, MIG-42, and Rafale, if they are equipped with the NG BVRAAM like Meteor (Effective range: 90~100 km+ to the 9G maneuverable fighter, and 150~200 km+ to the big, slow and clumsy airplanes like AWACS...) and R-77M-PD (Maximal effective range: 160 km+)

 

?????????

 

Who has posted this has some serious issues... I'll recomend reality check.

[Anytime]

Well according to EADS

 

"METEOR’s ramjet propulsion system provides no escape zones in excess of 100 km and speeds of more than Mach 4. Even when launched from extreme stand-off ranges, the missile has the energy in the end game to defeat fast and manoeuvring targets. To ensure total target destruction, the missile is equipped with both proximity and impact fuses and a fragmentation warhead that is detonated at the optimum point to maximise lethality. "

 

?????????

 

Who has posted this has some serious issues... I'll recomend reality check.