Mig-35 is a product for export first.
First of all, no it isn't, and second of all, the Su-30 pretty much is too, yet the Russian military are buying those as well.
A better stealth design would have give him precious advantage over other competitors in many countries.
To make it more stealthy would be to greatly increase the cost to buy and the cost to operate and it is never going to actually be stealthy...
Most of asian countries wants a fighter for air defence and antiship mission. Ground attack isn't really needed when it comes to defend against chinese navy or US navy.
So. The MiG-35 is a good fighter.
Russia will go only with sukhoi and mig-41 as interceptor.
Russia has ordered 6 MiG-35s for now... which isn't a huge amount but the first orders are never large... they have only ordered 12 Su-57s.
Mig company will be dead if they don't find more customers quickly and the mig-35 isn't that much advanced when you look what are other options.
What are the other options?
How advanced in the MiG-35?
You are making claims... please back those claims up so we can consider them as being facts rather than opinion.
What I'm pointing out is that they started the project in 2006 and had 12 years to make something better than just keeping a cleaner mig-29 design.
What was wrong with the MiG-29 design except old avionics and radar and engines?
This cleaner design won't make it low observable against modern radars.
When you use the thing you need to hang weapons under the wings or it is no use... when you hang weapons under the wings it wont be stealthy any more... so there is no point in making it stealthy or trying to.
They achieved to reduce the rcs but just like other rafale, typhoon or f-18, when you add the weapons it makes it no more low observable but at the level of older 4th generation fighters while radars have tramendously improved.
But you say what they need to do is make it more stealthy... are you trying to be funny?
You might as well say F-35 is too expensive and what it needs is to be even more stealthy... lets spend another trillion dollars to make it more stealthy... 500 million per aircraft will still be too expensive but I can wax on on the internet about how f'ing stealthy it is...
They should have tried to give it a new design but keeping the mig-29 agility and keeping it cheap by puting inside what we have today in the current mig-35 and nothing more like all those drone data links or whatever you find in f-35.
So a brand new design that is just as agile, but cheaper... of course... take any design and completely redesign it to get the same performance but make it cheaper... perhaps modify the engines so it sucks in carbon and plastic rubbish and all that comes out of the exhaust is puppies and LGBT rainbows...
For russia current mig-35 is good because no one will try to attack them in a big war so they can use it anywhere they want. But when you are a country that can potentialy be at war you want the best. A little bit bigger stealth mig-35 with aesa radar and a weapon bay with two or three missiles with the 8 external hardpoints would have won against rafale for sure.
Wow... Mr war expert... you have found the secret... a much more expensive MiG-35 that would only be stealthy when it only has 2-3 missiles is obviously what they need to focus on... because in the future when they have Su-57s flying around being stealthy what they really need is a MiG-35 with 2-3 missiles to support them... along with Su-35s with 12 or more missiles externally...
A new radar that can detect the enemy first without showing its presence like a lighthouse, and good missiles is all it needs... it will have jammers and decoys to defend itself from anything the enemy can attack it with.
or just read LM site with understanding?
Yeah.... that is LM in lie mode...
How many navalized "land" fighters did you see? 30 Rafales and 40 MiGs+ 20 Su? 1800 F-18 an dlik e500 F-18 SH are specifically designed for carriers. Of course with no apparent reason?
Most of it is politics... look at the F-4 Phantom... there is no reason why a carrier aircraft and a land based fighter need to be different except that the companies that make planes tended to specialise in either land or sea aircraft.... how many Mil helicopters are there in the Russian Navy... do you really think it is because they don't know how to make them compatible with the Marine environment?
Equally how many land based Kamov helos are there?
Ka-226 soon, but otherwise...
Thank you for agreeing with me
So the key is to use the best aircraft you can so when they meet in combat they have an advantage...
And how does it relate to new Russian fighter requirements? BTW Rafale is from 80s, F-35 200s and Russian will be 2025s but you already know its characteristics?
If you start a race with a vertical climb then that limits what sort of stuff you can carry... if you a climbing a vertical cliff face you can't take a motorbike with you... if you have a rolling takeoff a motorbike can get you moving real fast real quick.
its LM problem not mine lol1 lol1 lol1 Same with Su-33's magical payload which turned out to be 3300kg in A2A
The problem is you.
You think max theoretical payload must be max payload and it simply isn't.
The Su-24 had 8 weapon pylons each rated at 1,000km each, so the max payload is often given as 8 tons... except a normal payload is actually about 3 tons...
The theoretical max payload of an F-16 is 7 tons but it has never flown with anything like that payload weight... ever.
OK the you have Sukhois and you ant to spend billions of procurement of MiG-35? It will be a 50years concept in 2030s. You have to decide MiG-35 or new fighters with 2030s tech.
There is no reason why an F-4 Phantom could not operate today in Europe as a fighter... new engines, new radar, new missiles.... it might burn more fuel than a brand new aircraft, but with new engines that will only be because of the extra drag of the old airframe... at the end of the day an F-4 will be a fraction of the cost of an F-35... it will be able to shoot stuff down just as effectively and with all the old shit replaced with new shit it will be cheaper to maintain and operate and a fraction of the cost to build and buy.
It remained in service until replaced by Typhoon... but was there really a threat that required the expensive Typhoon to replace it?
We are in 2018 not in 2030 remember? MiG-35 will apparently include first AESA radar on a Russian fighter, modernized engines and up to date avionics, so many of those technologies you are talking about will be included, only in a cheaper, more efficient way.
Funny thing is that this MiG-35 that is obsolete and he wants to get rid of would be the most advanced fighter Russia has in service except for their expensive stealth fighter Su-57.
The first Russian fighter with AESA needs replacing already... but exactly what do you fill the gap with for the next 15 years while the new fighter is being developed?
Except for there are more AESA radars on Su-57 than on MiG-35.
There are more AESA radars on a Russian ship than on the Su-57...
So no, it isn't first Russian fighter with AESA. Its a joke how the MiG-35 has become.
Which is what makes it such an excellent fighter for Russia and for export... it will be underestimated by the enemy... and that will come at a real cost to the enemy.
Its small, and for Russia's airspace, it isn't necessary. They need the ability to fly fast and far. Plus, we have no idea what it is using for a radar. And what we do know of the tested radar, even at its greatest capabilities, it still doesn't compete against the Bars-R radar of Su-30SM.
The radar in the MiG-35 might not be perfect, but it will be the first of its generation and will only get better with experience and production...
I guess the total lack of a radar in the Yak-130 means they should all be replaced with Su-57s too?
Can Russia afford to replace all its current fighters with the biggest and most expensive planes it makes?
Why piss around with Su-30s and Su-35s if Su-57s are better?
Since Su-30SM and Su-35 are in full production. They are more capable. And their price tag is close to the MiG-35. That is from information that we know.
Bigger aircraft are more expensive to operate... larger aircraft compensate for the extra drag and extra weight with more powerful engines that burn more fuel.
When Su-30 and Su-35 get AESA their prices will likely double.
Anyway, I feel that their capabilities overlap each other. If they managed to come up with a much cheaper jet much like JF-17, J-10, F-16, etc but capable so that it interests nations who may not be able to afford the other jets, but want capabilities? Then awesome. But that just wasn't the MiG-35.
The Su-35 is no faster than a MiG-35, so with its longer flight range you try to use fewer aircraft to cover more area you are actually reducing your coverage and protection.
Most Su-27s in Russian AF use don't operate with full internal fuel so most of the time that extra size is a waste in western europe where the operational distances are not really that big.
A smaller aircraft would be rather more useful, simply because it would offer better coverage... if you need it to operate over a larger area it has inflight refuelling capability so the only real difference is radar apeture... and comparing an AESA with a bigger PESA... they will be very similar at the moment... but over the next decade or so the AESA is going to develop much much more than the PESA... which has already gone through plenty of upgrades and improvements.
When you buy a new car and you already have a small car for use in the city, you buy a bigger car to tow the boat, or to go skiing, or go camping... you don't buy another small car... and if you have a big car the wife will want a smaller car that is easier to park and drive around the city...
At a more fundamental level there are a number of supply contractors that each work with a design bureau... Klimov work with MiG, and NIIP work with MiG... if MiG disappears then you have a Sukhoi monopoly... and they can start dictating terms...
Yes, it would be better to have a smaller, single engine very cheap fighter instead a medium sized one which overlaps in some senses with the Sukhois but still is worse and not that much cheaper.
Small cheap single engined fighter... has not existed since the MiG-21 and it had enormous limitations that made it very weak in a lot of roles... poor payload and poor range... good speed... small and cheap to operate.
But you start putting modern avionics and radar and engine and it stops being cheap and simple.
Instead of being slightly behind the Flankers like the MiG-35 is in some parameters it will be very behind... and a lot less useful...
But the reality is that they don't have that ideal plane to work with but the MiG-29, so clearly the best they can do is to go for the MiG-35
The Mig-35 is vastly better than what you think they need, which is a good thing because what you think they need would be inadequate.
But they really need to emphasise and market its systems and capabilities. And reduce cost.
Getting an aircraft into mass production reduces costs...
RuAF is close new fighters procurement saturation, why to add another logistic chain, production line and jut second fighters with much overlapping abilities?
That extra chain is already in place... a better question is why close it down now that its finished product is ready for production... you wont get all that development money back.
OAK has problem now with enough Sukhois' orders to keep factories running.
They probably don't have enough production capacity for the demand, but international orders for MiG-35s will generate even more revenue.
The companies that work with MiG to make the 35 are different from those that worked with Sukhoi to make their 35, so the technologies and abilities are actually different in many areas.
A lot of people look at a MiG-29 and an Su-27 and ignorantly think they are the same plane but slightly differently scaled... the same people who look at a T-80 and a T-90 and think they are the same too... the insides are totally different, from different engines and radar and systems.
MiG wont be jobless at all: Skat + MiG-41, perhaps export contracts.
Of course they wont be jobless, but there will be no return on how many decades of investments and developments and hard work developing and improving systems... it is like your cynical analogy of unit price for the Su-57... 800 million per aircraft with only 12 made... except they wont get that much for them so lets say they pay 80 or 100 million... so a 700 million dollar loss on each aircraft... no company could carry that...
Oh yes fighter is cool, it can do its job, decent performance but first of all this want ever military project bu MiG own project. Military decided to invest money now in drones as you dont need to train pilots to do the job. Unmanned fighters will be the future. No human restrictions and you can make as many as your factories can make.
Hang on... so an order of 6 MiG-35s and you say the wont even bother eventually ordering more... they will just buy drones?
Will it be the same with STOVL fighters for the Navy?
if they wont buy they save even more.
They also don't have an airforce any more... they have a job to do and the tools they are currently using to do that job need replacing... they can't wait till 2030 for drones to suddenly become ready... and there of course is that problem that the drones they have come up against so far have been pathetically easy to deal with with current technology let alone what will be available in 10 years time...
I hope this is reliable news. In suc case Modi's poicy is now cleat heading towards Independence. Ready to fight for it.
But hang on... they have Flankers in service... why don't they replace all their old fighters with new Flankers?
I am sure an improved Su-30MKI could easily replace a MiG-21 or Jaguar...
Regarding RuAF: they are not "saturated" with new fighters, in fact the fleet is a far cry from the numbers deployed in Soviet times. So it is not "unnecessary" to buy capable fighters, for God's sake, Israel and Korea alone have more modern fighters than Russia...
Another factor is the numbers are rubbish... the Su-30 is supposed to be an affordable flanker while the Su-35 is the capable one and the Su-57 is the gold plated super next best thing... except the prices for the 30 and 35 seem about the same....
And regarding US sanctions against India for buying Russian military equipment... this is what that looks like: