MiG-29/ΜiG-35 Fulcrum: News #2

The MiG-29 was declassified and exposed decades ago when US got their hands on it.

So what?

Soviet migs and modern migs are not the same thing.

Thats why i am wondering what got exposed.

Probably soviet MiG's and early Russian MiG's.

If it isn't specified, then you are just assuming its something new.

Soviet migs and modern migs are not the same thing.

Thats why i am wondering what got exposed.

If its the Mig 35, that wouldn't be ideal. Even then, its an export plane. How could it be verified though? Some guy on the net could claim to be a Mig employee or something and make claims about the equipment on board. But it still has to be taken with a grain of salt.

Russia would sell Mig 35's to anyone and isn't that worried about things getting out. They get out anyway.

Ok, so at that point, Russia's allies would be endangered, and the West could just pick them off.
Russia without any allies would jyst get corned.

you are just being ridiculous for no reason.

So exactly which model was exposed then?

You seem worried, so that means you have details. Care to share it with us?

"So exactly which model was exposed then?"

That's what i wanna know.
As i asked in my post.

We don't know.

Did you watch the video? I tend not to click and watch those reactionary and stupid youtubers. Only people worth my time. If we click, we are giving them views and they earn to make more shit.

So if he doesn't say, then stop assuming. I know Challenger 2 was exposed for world of tanks. But I don't know beyond that.

Edit: the MiG-29 going all the way possibly MiG-29M has already been exposed and out there for the west. Russia during the 90's exposed most of their own gear, even the S-300PMU and S-300V. Honestly, it didn't make a difference and the systems still shoot down enemy jets. Challenger 2 was exposed but that doesn't stop it from working and doing its job.

I wouldn't really worry or care too much.

The Challenger 2 was apparently schematics on the armor, so the strengths and weaknesses of the Dorchester armor.
Not sure if that is better or worst than the Frenchman who leaked the entire operations manual of the LeClerc.
https://taskandpurpose.com/news/war-thunder-forum-military-technology-leaks/

And this is the most recent Mig-29 leak.
https://www.reddit.com/r/Warthunder/comments/10ht6s0/it_happened_again_from_what_i_have_seen_this/

Looks like some Soviet stuff that haven't been completely declassified.

So false alarm then.

A modern jf-17 with good avionics and good long range pl-15 missiles can hold its own against any f-16, f-15 or mig-35, su-35.

So what you are saying is that any plane with good avionics and the right missiles would be good enough... and that holds for any plane whether it has one or two engines so what you are saying is that the MiG-35 is actually a good plane... which is something you normally don't say...

There is nothing special about the JF-17... some people call it a modern MiG-21 but really it isn't because the MiG-21 was a chance for poor countries to have a new plane that was as fast as anyone elses plane and therefore relatively competitive.

The JF-17 is just a boring conservative design with nothing exciting or amazing... it is just cheap and simple, which should help it sell well but the MiG-35 is better all round and in a one on one would likely defeat it easily most of the time, but then the JF-17 was always supposed to be the numbers plane so that comparison would not be fair... except that the MiG-35 is a numbers plane as well so the comparison is fair.

Add some good stealth and weapon bay and you can fight any f-35 or su-57 with good chances of winning even if you have 1 rd-33 engine.

Adding stealth and internal weapons bay would take away its low cost and make it more expensive and less capable in the manouver department... very much like the F-35 is to the F-16. The F-35 was supposed to be a stealthy F-16 but turned out to be a stealthy Buccaneer... probably a nice strike aircraft but not a fighter.

Edit: I must admit that there is no space for weapon bays in small aircraft. Thus why su-75 still is pretty large (but not necessarly big!!). This mig design has no scale. It's either bigger than what they show or the weapon bays are very small.

It is the light numbers fighter, it will only be a bomb truck when stealth is no longer a consideration and then weapons can cover its wings and even upper surface with mini weapons bays a potential option moving forward.

The MiG design is displayed next to two other models... do you think that is an accident and they are all different scales?

The size of any cockpit is a good indicator which in this case suggests it is a lift sized aircraft... which together with an approximate engine size tells us this has to be a 6-10 ton aircraft considering the engine power, so it is likely to have a 2-4 ton payload capacity, which with modern weapons is going to be plenty for most missions anyway.

If it is small and has standard weapon bays then its range is very small and not worth buying it.

It is the light weight aircraft in a big little pairing... it does not need enormous range, though of course inflight refuelling is a thing... and it does not need massive payloads either because it is a numbers aircraft... in the conflict in Syria and now in Ukraine the aircraft carry a couple of AAMs and a couple of dumb bombs or anti radiation missiles or land attack missiles.

Hmm, as a carrier fighter it sure looks like the J-20/MiG 1.42 in a sense which is ideal design for interceptor.

Not really optimised for very high speed flight though is it...

But if they tout it for carrier base jet, then that is very interesting indeed. I wonder how big it would be?

It is the MiG-29K replacement... most likely Sukhoi will make an Su-57K to replace the Su-33.

The JF-17 used initially a RD-93 engine which is an up powered RD-33. I imagine they could easily modernize that one even further for something of a single engine fighter of 5th/6th gen.

The RD-93 shifts the gearbox to below the engine, but otherwise is a modern RD-33 engine... for any improved more powerful version they talk about there will be an improved more powerful version of the RD-33 too because the only real difference is the location of the gearbox.

These three models will likely all use a modernised 5th gen version of the RD-33 to boost performance.

Eventually such engines might be offered on MiG-35s and MiG-29Ms and MiG-29Ks to improve their performance too... and to improve commonality if they adopt them too.

Paralay was talking the other day, that they could maybe make a Mig 41 out of the su 57.

Except the purpose of the MiG-41 is to exceed the performance of the MIG-31 by flying Mach 4+... the goal is not to match it.

Besides if you want the Su-57 to fly at mach 3 then you need to completely replace all the materials to make it more heat resistant which will make it rather heavier and less manouverable... something it was designed for.

In essence, the Su-57 could indeed act as an interceptor. But its size limitations may also stand in the way for Khinzal missile launches. At that, its radar size too. If, instead the radar is upgraded to use GaN modules or more advanced GaAS modules of the 20-30W line, and new engines and generator can provide enough electricity for the radar, then it can extend the range.

My understanding of the MiG-31K is that it does not carry a radar because it wont be detecting the targets it will be launching missiles at anyway... the MiG-31K upgrade removed lots of weight and equipment that was not needed including the radar AFAIK so it can fly slightly faster than other model MiG-31s.

If it could do what it does with a radar installed then why not just use normal standard MiG-31s from units to launch these missiles...

I was more or less thinking that if MiG-41 is about same size as MiG-31, then it could carry a heavier radar and other weaponry.

It will likely require internal weapon carriage which on its own will make it bigger, but more sophisticated ramjet type engines would make it rather more efficient at very high flight speeds than the MiG-31 currently is.

I suspect the MiG-41 will be their first plane with experimental radar types... just like the 31 introduced an electronic scanning radar PESA array.

The only other aircraft to have such a radar at the time was the B-1B.

MoD will make the right decision though.

I am sure they will.

Some idiot declassified the Mig-29 and its weapon systems on an open gaming forum.
What the hell happened?
What was leaked?

The west has studied it in detail for the last 3-4 decades and have had their hands on most of the early types and played around with them.

Revealing secrets of the newer models is going to happen eventually anyway too, but will mean upgrades and improvements and changes to make them competitive.

The entire design of the F-35 was compromised by the Chinese... yet the west does not seem to care in terms of minions buying them.

Ok, so at that point, Russia's allies would be endangered, and the West could just pick them off.
Russia without any allies would jyst get corned.

That is not how things work...

Just knowing the secrets of some design does not render it useless... the solution to HATO learning all the secrets of the MiG-29 even if in a very early model for export to East Germany was a change in tactics... more money spent on AMRAAM and no engaging in close combat with MiG-29s...

Probably reduced the number of pilots they lost to them, but it was not enough to render them useless either.

So what you are saying is that any plane with good avionics and the right missiles would be good enough... and that holds for any plane whether it has one or two engines so what you are saying is that the MiG-35 is actually a good plane... which is something you normally don't say...

Very simplistic way of reorganize my words... mig-35 would be a very good plane to have if 5th gen fighters weren't fielded everywhere. Like I said it is a good plane but came too late. If they had 150 now around Ukraine would be good. But buy now 150 when Japan, US, EU are buying 5th gen fighter which are very hard to lock on with x babd radars and getting 200km missiles, mig-35 would be useless. Su-75 exists, make it faster and buy it.

Adding stealth and internal weapons bay would take away its low cost and make it more expensive and less capable in the manouver department... very much like the F-35 is to the F-16. The F-35 was supposed to be a stealthy F-16 but turned out to be a stealthy Buccaneer... probably a nice strike aircraft but not a fighter.

Sure. But it will have a chance against other 5th gen aircraft. Your mig-35 or su-35 is gonna pick up hundreds km away by F-35 or f-22 while they won't see anyone.

Same what is happening with su-35+r-37 against ukro mig-29. The technological difference is so huge that they stand no chance.

If you want to face a stealthy aircraft you better have some stealth capabilities. If not you will get 6 or 7 missiles from 200km away.

It is the light weight aircraft in a big little pairing... it does not need enormous range, though of course inflight refuelling is a thing... and it does not need massive payloads either because it is a numbers aircraft... in the conflict in Syria and now in Ukraine the aircraft carry a couple of AAMs and a couple of dumb bombs or anti radiation missiles or land attack missiles

Actually you need at least 1000km range. Bellow that it won't be bought. Lesson learned from mig-29 that saw its range increase in M versions to around 1000km and all tge former mig-29 got removed from service.

Internal weapon bays also allows to not have increase of drag because of external weapons. A french pilot said that is actually a terrible factor which could highly impact the range (by1.5 to 3). A bonus point for su-75 contrary to mig-35.

Su-75 still not exist, like even the S-70 that is in an even more advanced stage of development.
As an operative plane I mean.
Mig-35 has been already produced and is in service albeit in quite small numbers,
Even the Su-57 with an advanced engine is still a thing of the future and they actually still producing batches of Su-35 and Su3SM forthe VKS and VMF even if the baseline Su-57 is already in production.
That's because the Flankers are faster to go into full rate production and could replace legacy planes without requiring a complete refurbish of existing bases.

So, I think that the real question is: it is Mig-35 ready to go into full rate production in the space of let's say an year?
In this case let's go for it, produce it until the end of the 2023-2028 period and after this look if S-70 and Su-75 are ready for introduction into service.
Period.

Why would they produce it if no one buys it ?

Su-75 has a real market value. Mig 35 was rejected by India, the country for which it was produced, and mig-29M was sold in some numbers to complete some air forces like Algerian or Egyptian that needed such aircraft.

There is no room for the mig-35.

The ones for Russia were for testing and aerobatic teams. There is no hint for a potential mass use of mig-35. Even less with su-75 in the labs.

Best option IMO is to take that single engine design, fit the AESA radar and all the equipement created for the mig-35 in it which should all be ready by now and use the rd-93 engine. Use also the weapon bay of the su-57. Everything is developed and the work would be to integrate them in that new design and test it which should be very fast. Then such aircraft could have potential clients.

Isos wrote:Sure. But it will have a chance against other 5th gen aircraft. Your mig-35 or su-35 is gonna pick up hundreds km away by F-35 or f-22 while they won't see anyone.

Same what is happening with su-35+r-37 against ukro mig-29. The technological difference is so huge that they stand no chance.

If you want to face a stealthy aircraft you better have some stealth capabilities. If not you will get 6 or 7 missiles from 200km away.

can a F35 or any other Stealth aircraft detect a Mig-35 200 km away without actively scanning with their radar?

Because if they need to use the radar actively they can be traced as well.

And now, please do not tell me that the F35, F22, etc can use the radar capabilities of other land based  infrastructures or from an AWACS aircraft, because those are not stealth and would be the first receivers of a salvo of missiles in a war.

If you get to a point of having a war between NATO aircrafts and russian aircrafts, all the infrastructures and support aircrafts, etc used by USAF and allies become also fair game.

E.g. let's say a F22 or a F35take off from a base in Romania, Poland or Germany to go and try to shoot against russian aircrafts in ukraine. The airfields and the radar installation on the ground would become receivers of nice iskanders and similar, and the air tankers and AWACS aircrafts, etc instead will welcome a group of incoming air to air missiles destined to them.

So the stealth aircraft would be soon without support, much different condition from what they trained for. And that is if they already took off before the airfield was targeted.

Otherwise a mig 35 could actually take off also from a normal road, while the fifth generation aircrafts will have to stay on the ground if the airfield is damaged.

They have datalinks. One f-35 scan the air the others keep their radars turned off. With meteors they will be shooting those migs 200km away. That f-35 using its radar will be quite safe and could turn off its radar after few seconds to evade some potential missiles.

Facing su-75 they would need to come much closer and both would be withing missile range of the other.

Awacs with their 450km range can bring a nice power up. Keep some f-22 between the awacs and the mig and it will be safe.

Unless it is a nuclear armed iskander, you would need tens if not one hundred of them to really destroy an airfield with missiles. Nato air forces don't pack their planes at one spot like russians. You would need one missile for one target/plane.

So that the F-22 can be shot down instead of the AWACS?
Good idea

Or do you think is very easy to shoot down a salvo of Mach5 R37M missiles?

By the way, if one F35 scans at least the threat it poses and its  general location will be known.

Or do you think the Mig-35 operators will be so stupid to wait to be shot down from a AIM-260 or AiM-120 without doing nothing?

By the way MiG 35 also have the possibility to use something similar to datalinks and use targeting data from other russian systems for their missiles.

Basically for you to be right the scenario should be a again a couple of Mig-35 alone, without support, against 2 F35 supported by other 10 aircrafts

If you position your f-22 well they will shoot their missiles first. Even russian sources give su-35 detection range of some 90km against a f-22. F-22 will have the first look first shoot.

What support does russian air force has more than Nato ? They have few flying awacs and much less fighters. Long range AD operates only in your own territories and if it is close to the front line it can be targeted by MLRS.

What could a mig-35 pilot do ? It will be detected from far away by one f-35 and won't know where the others are. Meanwhile its buddy migs and sukhois will also be detected. Active radar missile don't emmit and you don't know they are launched before the few last seconds.

That's like russian su-35 launching r-77 and r-37M in Ukraine against ukraine migs that don't even pick them up on their radars.

Stealth + long range radar + long range missiles is a quite good tool. To fight it you must either have new detection tools not affected by it with long range missiles or also have stealth to make the detection very hard and make the 200km range missiles only useful at 50km.

And you believe that those "stealth" aircrafts are invisibile to nebo-m radar (which are also in Crimea) or voronezh radar?

Furthermore the advertised stealth is in perfect condition and with perfect coatings. Many pictures of F22 flying around showed conditions much worse, and that means a degradation of the RCS.

Finally the aircraft have to be in superclean conditions (e.g. no external missiles and no external tanks (otherwise the stealth is not that good). That means a reduced range and no, they cannot easily use tankers if they are openly at war with Russia, as those would be shot down first, as they are also quite big.

From Berlin to Kiev it is about 1400 km, Ramstein to Kiev even more
Of course bases in Romania or Poland would be closer but do you believe in case of hot war they would be left untouched?


Finally we do not know anything about the actual radar capabilities that a production line Mig-35 for Russia can have. If you refer to the specs of the export model offered more than 10 years ago to India you are not objective.

Note:

according to Lockheed, the effective combat radius of the F-22 is 1 400 kilometres, although that is probably the distance assuming 10min loiter. The actual, effective combat radius (without drop tanks) is around 850 kilometres

For the F35 (from a pro western forum)

Official “range” figures for the F-35 variants are low-balled; often they’re actually shorter than 2x the combat radius of the jet. To understand what I’m talking about, we first need to learn about the F-35’s combat radius:

According to the Pentagon’s annual F-35 Selected Acquisition Reports, the demonstrated air-to-ground combat radius of each F-35 variant is:

F-35A: 669 nautical miles / 1239km
F-35B: 505 nautical miles / 935km
F-35C: 670 nautical miles / 1241km
Like the radius of a circle, a combat radius is the distance that an aircraft can fly away from an airbase and perform some mission before returning. The 1-way range / total distance flown during a sortie (flight) like that is at least double the combat radi.

They have datalinks. One f-35 scan the air the others keep their radars turned off.

This is something that Russian aircraft can also do, A-50 or Su-35 can scan and send the information to Mig-35 with radars off.

With meteors they will be shooting those migs 200km away.

Only if the Migs fly in a straight line and don't do evasive maneuvers. The rocket engine of an air-to-air missile stays on for only a few seconds, after which the missile gradually begins to lose speed, energy and maneuverability, the maximum range of a missile is only practical against slow, large and poorly maneuverable aircraft. Against maneuverable fighters the maximum range of an air-to-air missile will not exceed a few tens of kilometers, except for missiles with massive range like PL-15 and R-37.

Unless it is a nuclear armed iskander, you would need tens if not one hundred of them to really destroy an airfield with missiles.

It only takes ONE missile to hit the middle of the runway, no aircraft takes off with a crater in the middle of the runway, damage that would take days to repair.

Nato air forces don't pack their planes at one spot like russians

Yes they do. In 2012 USA lost 8 Harriers in Afghanistan in a Taliban attack.

Even russian sources give su-35 detection range of some 90km against a f-22. F-22 will have the first look first shoot.

The NEZ of an air-air missile tends to correspond to 1/3 or 1/4 of the maximum range of the missile, it depends on the missile, detected at 90 km the F-22 will already be within the NEZ of the R-37 (400km range ) while the Su-35 would still be outside the NEZ of the AIM-120D (180km range). And the situation would be even worse with A-50 and radars on the ground sharing information with Russian fighters through the datalink.

All this back and forth is meaningless. Main customer, MoD tested MiG-35 for the last 5+ years and only ordered 6 planes for acrobatic group, even if original order was speculated to be for 48 planes. I guess they showed what they think about the future of the plane by not buying more.

And you believe that those "stealth" aircrafts are invisibile to nebo-m radar (which are also in Crimea) or voronezh radar?

Furthermore the advertised stealth is in perfect condition and with perfect coatings. Many pictures of F22 flying around showed conditions much worse, and that means a degradation of the RCS.

Impressively stealthy against radar of missiles and fighters.

Ground based radars have too many dead zones to be always helpful.

From Berlin to Kiev it is about 1400 km, Ramstein to Kiev even more
Of course bases in Romania or Poland would be closer but do you believe in case of hot war they would be left untouched?

No drag with internal weapon bays. Mig-35 will have reduced range with external stuff.

Drop tanks can be used for the first part of the trip and droped.

This is something that Russian aircraft can also do, A-50 or Su-35 can scan and send the information to Mig-35 with radars off.

They have far smaller detection ranges against stealthy f-22 and f-35. With meteors the f-35 will be able to shoot at all of them before they see them on screens.

Numbers of a-50 is quite low. Even less modern a-50U and a-100.

Only if the Migs fly in a straight line and don't do evasive maneuvers. The rocket engine of an air-to-air missile stays on for only a few seconds, after which the missile gradually begins to lose speed, energy and maneuverability, the maximum range of a missile is only practical against slow, large and poorly maneuverable aircraft. Against maneuverable fighters the maximum range of an air-to-air missile will not exceed a few tens of kilometers, except for missiles with massive range like PL-15 and R-37.

It's pretty hard to know that an ARH missile is fly at you.

Meteor is a very long range missile. That's why they integrated r-37M on su-35.

US are developing a long range missile too and meteor is integrated on the f-35.

It only takes ONE missile to hit the middle of the runway, no aircraft takes off with a crater in the middle of the runway, damage that would take days to repair.

Not really. Nato airports have pretty long and large runways and a fighter needs roughly 1000m of it. Hole can be repaired quickly.

Yes they do. In 2012 USA lost 8 Harriers in Afghanistan in a Taliban attack.

It's an afghan airport.

The NEZ of an air-air missile tends to correspond to 1/3 or 1/4 of the maximum range of the missile, it depends on the missile, detected at 90 km the F-22 will already be within the NEZ of the R-37 (400km range ) while the Su-35 would still be outside the NEZ of the AIM-120D (180km range). And the situation would be even worse with A-50 and radars on the ground sharing information with Russian fighters through the datalink.

Before it comes to 90km to detect the f-22 it will have to face those amraams.

Like I said it's almost impossible to know an amraam if flying at you. No hard lock on needed.

US have far more and more modern AWACS as well as refueling planes. Big advantage for them in numbers.

Russia would have ground radars but they are far more impacted by ground obstacles. They could be safe above their SAMs but won't be able to go outside the zone.

They have far smaller detection ranges against stealthy f-22 and f-35. With meteors the f-35 will be able to shoot at all of them before they see them on screens.

This is just an illusion created by people who don't take into account things like average RCS and NEZ.
Their detection range against the F-22/35 is greater than the effective range of the Meteor/AIM-120D.

Numbers of a-50 is quite low. Even less modern a-50U and a-100.
US have far more and more modern AWACS as well as refueling planes. Big advantage for them in numbers.

And Russia has a much greater superiority in long-range missiles like the R-37/33, created specifically to deal with American AWACS.

It's pretty hard to know that an ARH missile is fly at you

That's what the MAWS was created for, not to mention that if a radar can detect a stealth aircraft at tens/hundreds of kilometers it can detect an air-to-air missile.

Meteor is a very long range missile. That's why they integrated r-37M on su-35.

100-200km range, that's 2 to 4 times less than the R-37.

US are developing a long range missile too and meteor is integrated on the f-35.

None of which compete with the R-37 in terms of speed and range.

ot really. Nato airports have pretty long and large runways and a fighter needs roughly 1000m of it. Hole can be repaired quickly

Unlike Russian and Swedish fighters, the F-22/35 does not have the robustness to operate on runways in bad conditions or even with little damage. A hole can be
repaired in a few days, but these will be days when your aviation's combat capability will be crippled.

It's an afghan airport...

...which was controlled and used by the US military which, contradicting
your claim, pack their planes at one point.

Before it comes to 90km to detect the f-22 it will have to face those amraams.

No, because as I said, the NEZ of a missile is 1/3 to 1/4 of the missile's maximum range, so an AIM-120D with a maximum range of 180km would have a NEZ of 45-60km.

Meteor is a ramjet missile powered all the way. Its NOZ is way greater than actual missiles.

R-37M is very good but if your su-35 can detect the f-22 only 90km away its range is 90km. At this point just use r-77-1 which is lighter and more manoeuvrable.

NOZ isn't as important as you think with active radar missiles. You know there is a fighter radar scaning the airspace but you have no idea it launched a missile at you. So unless you start manoeuvring randomly the missile will reach you. Aim-120D with its 160km will still have longer range than your r-37M in such case.

Su-35 can detect a f-22 at 90km and probably an amraam or meteor but missiles are launched in a lofted trajectory. They go up very fast at higher altitudes. Since your radar will look at the f-22 it won't find the missile much higher. You need to move the antenna to scan high to detect the missile in which case you don't see the f-22.

Stealth is important. 4th gen fighter can't compete especially since they also have avionics and electronics few generation older than 5th gen aircraft.

That's why sukhoi made the su-57 and now presents the su-75. Mig is stuck in the past with its mig-35 eventhough it has everything to create a mass producable 5th gen fighter.

Meteor is a ramjet missile powered all the way. Its NOZ is way greater than actual missiles.

No, the meteor doesn't have the fuel to keep the ramjet engine running all the way, let alone 200km.

R-37M is very good but if your su-35 can detect the f-22 only 90km away its range is 90km

Detecting the F-22 at more than 90km means that it can already start attacking,
since a missile with 400km range will certainly have a NEZ with more than 100km.

At this point just use r-77-1 which is lighter and more manoeuvrable.

No, because a missile with a range of 110km like the R-77 will have a NEZ of less than 40km.

NOZ isn't as important as you think with active radar missiles. You know there is a fighter radar scaning the airspace but you have no idea it launched a missile at you.

Radar, IRST, MAWS can detect enemy missiles from tens of kilometers.

They go up very fast at higher altitudes. Since your radar will look at the f-22 it won't find the missile much higher. You need to move the antenna to scan high to detect the missile in which case you don't see the f-22.

Detecting multiple targets at different altitudes is something that fighter radars have been doing for decades, and with an elevation angle of +/- 45° no fighter with ESA radar will need to be "moving" in order to detect targets at different altitudes.

Stealth is important. 4th gen fighter can't compete especially since they also have avionics and electronics few generation older than 5th gen aircraft.

4th generation fighters have numerous variants as they have gone through many modernization processes, Su-35, Mig-35, Gripen E/F, Rafale F4, Typhoon trench 3 all of them have everything that 5th generation has, except stealth, stealth that is counterbalanced by AWACS, anti-stealth radars and datalink making any 4++ fighter, with proper support, able to handle 5th gen fighters.

No, the meteor doesn't have the fuel to keep the ramjet engine running all the way, let alone 200km.

It has a throtable ramjet engine meaning it can control how much fuel it burns and reduce or increase the comsumption. Thanks to this it is powered all the way.

Detecting the F-22 at more than 90km means that it can already start attacking,
since a missile with 400km range will certainly have a NEZ with more than 100km.

Since even sukhoi states a 90km for a 0.1m2 target how do you want to detect it further away ? Meanwhile your su-35 has a clean 3m2 from the front, much more with weapons allowing the f-22 to detect it at some 250-350km depending on the its radar stats which I don't know.

F-22s will launch all their missiles before the su-35s detects them.

No, because a missile with a range of 110km like the R-77 will have a NEZ of less than 40km.

Again, that works only if you know the missile was launched and you immediatly escape. With ARH missile guided thanks to a second fighter's rawar through datalink you have no idea it was launched.

Fighter 1 will use its radar and gives your coordinates to a fighter 2 100km away from fighter 1 and fighter 2 will launch missiles at you.

In that case you can use them almost at max range.

Radar, IRST, MAWS can detect enemy missiles from tens of kilometers.

In theory.

Aim 120 at max range will just fall onto you with no engine running so small IR signature detectable only few km away making evasion impossible.

Meteor and r-37M will come at mach 3 even if you detect them it will be impossible to escape.

Detecting multiple targets at different altitudes is something that fighter radars have been doing for decades, and with an elevation angle of +/- 45° no fighter with ESA radar will need to be "moving" in order to detect targets at different altitudes

In reality you need to focus your beam to sea better. You can't just scan all the airspace 180° by 45° and detect everything.

The irbis-e in order to detect a fighter 400km away need to focus its beam in a tinny cone. Making scaning of the airspace very long.

4th generation fighters have numerous variants as they have gone through many modernization processes, Su-35, Mig-35, Gripen E/F, Rafale F4, Typhoon trench 3 all of them have everything that 5th generation has, except stealth, stealth that is counterbalanced by AWACS, anti-stealth radars and datalink making any 4++ fighter, with proper support, able to handle 5th gen fighters.

Yeah and 5th gen fighters have them too and they last variants of everything. Their stealth allows to reduce detection ranges of x band radars of fighters by a great factor.

The difference in detection ranges is too much impacting to say 4th gen fighters are good against them.

5th gen fighters are way better. That's a fact. I'm here talking about only their technologies though. Then you need to compare costs, maintenance, numbers and so on... which goes against 5th gen fighters. Having 12 f-35 that can be targeted in 20minutes by cruise missiles or iskanders on their parking areas like it is the case for Polish f-35 is useless. They will be easily destroyed on the ground.

But technologically speaking they are way better than 4th gen fighters. And if the su-75 or that single engine mig can be produced as cheap as an su-30 then go for it.

In terms of prices export mig-29M are just as expensive as su-30MK2. So mig-35 production prices aren't any cheaper than su-30. Not something good wheb the plane is almost two times smaller.