MiG-29/ΜiG-35 Fulcrum: News #2

GarryB wrote:

Here in New Zealand when they were retiring the Skyhawks they didn't even come to the south island for a farewell flight because it was "too far"... I am sure they justified it up north by saying everything is in the North Island and there is nothing in the South Island that would need protecting... they can't protect everywhere after all... of course if the hydro dams in the south island went it would get very dark in the north island very quickly...

well, it is price of living in so huge country

MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The Russian Aerospace Forces have received two modern MiG-35 fighters and will receive four more before the end of the year, Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG Director General Ilya Tarasenko said.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201906171075905609-russia-mig-35-fighters/

Cyberspec wrote:MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The Russian Aerospace Forces have received two modern MiG-35 fighters and will receive four more before the end of the year, Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG Director General Ilya Tarasenko said.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201906171075905609-russia-mig-35-fighters/

then why they had said that the contract of 6 will be fulfilled by 2023 since all 6 will have been delivered by the end of 2019??

Possibly anticipating potential problems perhaps?

Getting them into service quickly is a good thing... and personally I would like to see them make quite a lot of the cheaper simpler MiG-29M2 aircraft that they could later upgrade to MiG-35 standard with upgraded components when those upgraded components are cheaper...

AMCXXL wrote:

George1 wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The Russian Aerospace Forces have received two modern MiG-35 fighters and will receive four more before the end of the year, Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG Director General Ilya Tarasenko said.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201906171075905609-russia-mig-35-fighters/

then why they had said that the contract of 6 will be fulfilled by 2023 since all 6 will have been delivered by the end of 2019??

This news appears every month but it is not true, what happened in reality is that the two prototypes of MiG-35, No.702 and No.712, have reached the Polygon of Akhtubinsk to complete the latest state tests

For the moment only a MiG-35UB Nº11 has lifted the flight for test at the factory of Lujovitsi and will not be delivered to the tropos until the end of years, in a batch of 4 aircraft that is planned for this year

so 0/6 till now

George1 wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The Russian Aerospace Forces have received two modern MiG-35 fighters and will receive four more before the end of the year, Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG Director General Ilya Tarasenko said.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201906171075905609-russia-mig-35-fighters/

then why they had said that the contract of 6 will be fulfilled by 2023 since all 6 will have been delivered by the end of 2019??

 NO, NOT AGAIN!
In Russia contracts are awarded using the formula "in the framework of the (20xx to) 20xx+10 State Acquisition Program".
Said SAP cover nominally a 10 years long period but in reality there is a revision every 5 years, in which a new one would be redacted and would substitute the old.
So, in reality the contract are awarded within a five years interval.

The final date of the SAP doesn't mean that any contract awarded would last until the final year of the framework, less even that the numbers contracted would be split in even parts in each years from the signing of itto that precise date but just that it would be in any case finished during that interval of time.
A contract that start before the closing date of the current SAP but is scheduled to end after such date would instead be awarded into the next five years framework.

It this quite regular scansion the actual SAP would be an exception, it would have been named 2016-2025 but it was delayed as a consequence of the coup and the conflict in Ukraina and so it became the 2019- 2028 to be followed by the 2024-2033.
Contracts would instead be awarded into frameworks ending respectively in 2023, 2028 and 2033.

So, expect the contracts to be awarded "under the framework of the 2023 program" to be quite few and relatively small.
Such framework would in reality be an hollow one, lasting three years only as the majority of actual contracts, referring mainly to 4++ gen Flankers, were awarded "in the framework of the 2020" while the full production ones of Su-57 and Mig-35 would be probably awarded in the second leg of the "modified" 2019-2028 SAP i.e. they would have the denomination of "in the framework of the 2028 program" instead.

marcellogo wrote:

George1 wrote:

Cyberspec wrote:MOSCOW (Sputnik) - The Russian Aerospace Forces have received two modern MiG-35 fighters and will receive four more before the end of the year, Russian Aircraft Corporation MiG Director General Ilya Tarasenko said.

https://sputniknews.com/military/201906171075905609-russia-mig-35-fighters/

then why they had said that the contract of 6 will be fulfilled by 2023 since all 6 will have been delivered by the end of 2019??

 NO, NOT AGAIN!
In Russia contracts are awarded using the formula "in the framework of the (20xx to) 20xx+10 State Acquisition Program".
Said SAP cover nominally a 10 years long period but in reality there is a revision every 5 years, in which a new one would be redacted and would substitute the old.
So, in reality the contract are awarded within a five years interval.

The final date of the SAP doesn't mean that any contract awarded would last until the final year of the framework, less even that the numbers contracted would be split in even parts in each years from the signing of itto that precise date but just that it would be in any case finished during that interval of time.
A contract that start before the closing date of the current SAP but is scheduled to end after such date would instead be awarded into the next five years framework.

It this quite regular scansion the actual SAP would be an exception, it would have been named 2016-2025 but it was delayed as a consequence of the coup and the conflict in Ukraina and so it became the 2019- 2028 to be followed by the 2024-2033.
Contracts would instead be awarded into frameworks ending respectively in 2023, 2028 and 2033.

So, expect the contracts to be awarded "under the framework of the 2023 program" to be quite few and relatively small.
Such framework would in reality be an hollow one, lasting three years only as the majority of actual contracts, referring mainly to 4++ gen Flankers, were awarded "in the framework of the 2020" while the full production ones of Su-57 and Mig-35 would be probably awarded in the second leg of the "modified" 2019-2028 SAP i.e. they would have the denomination of "in the framework of the 2028 program" instead.

Plus they re adjust when there is left over money and or other projects get put on hold or cancelled so they re-orientate the money elsewhere.

Rob Lee
@RALee85
·
4h
Looks like there is a new MiG-35UB (blue 11).
Photo: Анатолий Бурцев

MiG-35UB - featuring the T-220 container


T-220 GIF
https://twitter.com/DenisDionisov/status/1027978414395928583

And it has those vortex generators deployed on its LERXs... nice pic... thanks.

So, the Russian air Force is getting 4 (production) Mig-35 this year.

would it be sensible in the meanwhile to send a couple of pre-production mig-35 for the idlib operation in Syria?

It could help getting some operational testing and maybe gain some more chances for the indian new Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft competition...

The main problem there is that the MiG-35 is primarily a short/medium range interceptor most of the time with some medium range strike missions later on when the skies are cleared of enemy fighters.

It would be a great place to test Su-25 variants and upgrades and new bits and pieces...

Testing coordination of air strikes with ground forces would be useful... perhaps technology where the MiG-35 can look for ground targets near friendly forces and pass on real time aerial views of enemy positions for the commanders on the ground to select targets for the pilots to engage would be useful and meaningful and help prevent friendly fire and promote cooperation between the ground forces and the air force.

But then you could probably get the same cooperation with Su-25 and Mi-28NM and Ka-52 pilots too... with the same results...

GarryB wrote:The main problem there is that the MiG-35 is primarily a short/medium range interceptor most of the time with some medium range strike missions later on when the skies are cleared of enemy fighters.

It would be a great place to test Su-25 variants and upgrades and new bits and pieces...

Testing coordination of air strikes with ground forces would be useful... perhaps technology where the MiG-35 can look for ground targets near friendly forces and pass on real time aerial views of enemy positions for the commanders on the ground to select targets for the pilots to engage would be useful and meaningful and help prevent friendly fire and promote cooperation between the ground forces and the air force.

But then you could probably get the same cooperation with Su-25 and Mi-28NM and Ka-52 pilots too... with the same results...

Of course, it is mainly to show that they tested on a "real" environment.

After all, until Syria, USA said all the time: our equipment are battle tested, Russian equipment not.

Of course in the case of USA it was mostly in war against enemies that could not defend themselves, but that "ticked the box". as I wrote, it can help also with export, since in the possible customer nations many journalists and people with no industrial or military understanding can otherwise complain with the politicians for acquiring untested weapons from the former "commies" instead of western equipment. (If they are paid or corrupt, they could do the same, but sfter Russia's Syria campaign is quite difficult to negate the evidence.


And anyway, Russia already tested most of their aircrafts and helicopters there.

Everybody is already aware of the good air to air capabilities of the mig-29 family.

It could be good to remind that the mig-35 is not just an untested prototype and that, in addition to that, it is a fully multirole aircraft with also air to ground capabilities (that btw, also the mig29M/mig29SMT possesses) (the latter was tested in syria already)

I appreciate what you are saying, and the Russians are not stupid, they know Syria is an opportunity to improve and perfect systems, but they need to be practical... the MiG-35 might be a good platform for Syria to grow in to, now that they have a proper IADS, it will serve them rather better than their older cheaper MiG-29s, but for Russia experience in the Syrian theatre wont be so valuable for them because their primary threats come from NATO and NATO friendly countries for which experience against ISIS is of minimal value.

Sure the Americans will claim Russian equipment is bad or untested, and a lot of countries that don't actually have a choice will claim that is why they are paying enormous amounts of money for American alternatives that on paper and in a real conflict zone are inferior, but then these purchases are often funded by US financial aide that they have to spend on US products anyway, so it is not like mature combat experienced Russian alternatives would actually have made a real difference anyway.

Besides, the Americans will run down all competition and talk up their own products no matter what the situation... and people who buy American stuff often don't care... they are not buying US helicopters, they are buying good will in other areas with the US by becoming a client state... if you buy enough you can openly murder people and they don't give a shit... ask Saudi Arabia... Morals for hire as per usual.

I think some MiG-29M2s might be good... test them there and then when things are to be scaled down hand them over to the Syrian forces and they are cheap enough that when things have slowed down they will be earning again and can buy a few more just to keep Israel out of its air space.

I also think the Russians should order 300 odd MiG-29M2s as well as the 50 odd MiG-35s... and over time upgrade those MiG-20M2s with more and more MiG-35 components until they are practically the same aircraft as the more expensive parts get operational experience and also improve in quality then you can expand production for all of the MiGs you keep in service and use them to replace all existing older MiG models.

Interview with Indian airforce Mig 29 pilot

https://hushkit.net/2019/08/12/flying-fighting-in-the-mig-29-interview-with-indian-air-force-fulcrum-pilot-air-marshal-harish-masand/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Austin wrote:Interview with Indian airforce Mig 29 pilot

https://hushkit.net/2019/08/12/flying-fighting-in-the-mig-29-interview-with-indian-air-force-fulcrum-pilot-air-marshal-harish-masand/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

He obviously likes the 29...

from the same website

MiG-29 versus Mirage 2000: personal account from Air Marshal Harish Masand
https://hushkit.net/2019/08/12/mig-29-versus-mirage-2000-personal-account-from-by-air-marshal-harish-masand/

_____

Interesting comment from the second in charge of the VKS on the MiG-35...he says the main advantage it has over the Su-30/35 is that it's significantly cheaper to operate....1.5 times cheaper per flight hour

https://www.militarynews.ru/story.asp?rid=1&nid=514855&lang=RU

Makes sense that a smaller lighter aircraft uses less fuel to move it around the sky.

Most importantly it operates at the same speed as the larger Flankers... so with inflight refuelling should be able to cover the same area in a similar amount of time...

In more densely populated areas of western Russia it makes more sense to have smaller lighter fighters covering the airspace...

GarryB wrote:Makes sense that a smaller lighter aircraft uses less fuel to move it around the sky.

Most importantly it operates at the same speed as the larger Flankers... so with inflight refuelling should be able to cover the same area in a similar amount of time...

In more densely populated areas of western Russia it makes more sense to have smaller lighter fighters covering the airspace...

Presumably the same in parts of India.

As with many things in life, in some situations there is no substitute for quantity, especially at the pinicle of weapon systems, fighter aircraft.

GarryB wrote:Makes sense that a smaller lighter aircraft uses less fuel to move it around the sky.

Most importantly it operates at the same speed as the larger Flankers... so with inflight refuelling should be able to cover the same area in a similar amount of time...

In more densely populated areas of western Russia it makes more sense to have smaller lighter fighters covering the airspace...

the MiG-29 was designed for countries like Bulgaria or Poland, basically small European countries, Flanker was more for Siberia, China or India, but the Fulcrum lost its main market after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia then opted for the Flanker for long range patrols, but the Fulcrum is an excellent platform but the reality they are not as cheap as to say they had a range advantage or weapons load, thus Russia bought Su-35s and Su-30MS, the Fulcrum seems to have a small window of opportunity because Russia at this moment has not a light fighter of the 5th generation thus a combination of a modernized Fulcrum and Su-57 makes sense, but the reality is Russia needs a modern type of light fighter.


I love the fulcrum but I have to admit is a little bit old now

the MiG-29 was designed for countries like Bulgaria or Poland, basically small European countries, Flanker was more for Siberia, China or India,

Not true at all... based in the more densely populated western region of Russia and the Soviet Union a smaller lighter fighter makes rather more sense than a big heavy long range fighter.

Most of the detection and interception would be done by ground controllers so much of the time the interceptor would not be using their own radar anyway, and having more smaller fighters gives you better coverage if the bigger aircraft flys at the same speed... the only way to make the Flanker cost effective is to have half as many and located them further apart... which creates big gaps in the air defence where cruise missiles and low flying bombers can take advantage of.

The MiG-29 was developed for Soviet air defence, and the Flanker was an afterthought for longer ranged missions to replace the Tu-128 and Su-15M and MiG-23.

but the Fulcrum lost its main market after the fall of the Soviet Union, Russia then opted for the Flanker for long range patrols, but the Fulcrum is an excellent platform but the reality they are not as cheap as to say they had a range advantage or weapons load, thus Russia bought Su-35s and Su-30MS, the Fulcrum seems to have a small window of opportunity because Russia at this moment has not a light fighter of the 5th generation thus a combination of a modernized Fulcrum and Su-57 makes sense, but the reality is Russia needs a modern type of light fighter.

Not even the US can afford to have an all heavy fighter air fleet... whether it is F-22 or F-15... it is not just purchase price, but operational costs of heavy aircraft get expensive very fast.

Pretty much anything you can put in a Su-35 you could put in a MiG-35, except that the MiG has a DAS system and a few other features the Flanker lacks like the MiG-35 unification with the MiG-29KR design meaning if the Russian Navy wants more carrier based fighters they don't need to wait for someone else to buy some to share setup costs for production... they can just tag an order on the end of an Air Force order for MiG-35s or MiG-29M2s.

Russia really has an opportunity to show India what smart is by buying 50 MiG-35s together with 250 Mig-29M2s with the view to in a 5-10 year period gradually adding MiG-35 level technology to the MiG-29M2s as it becomes cheaper and mature, so that by 2025-2030 they will have 300 MiG-35Ms.

They will be just as capable at 90% of missions an Su-30 or Su-35 could do at reduced operational costs... certainly a tiny fraction of the operational costs of an F-35.

I am not a great supporter of Russia spending a lot of money making a lot of fighters and a lot of tanks, but the presence of MiGs on NATO borders will force NATO to buy more of their own F-35s and fly them around their borders too... and the costs of operating the F-35 will likely destroy NATO... or get them to see reason at least.

The MiG-29 was developed as fighter jet for the Frontal Aviation for use above the front (line of engagement). That´s why it was based in the western parts of Russia and the eastern european countries (including more then 400 in the GDR).