C'mon Garry this is below your standards. It has literally nothing to do with what I said.
How often could they have possibly used their new radars... a few hours maybe but they are soooo much better...
It is making a brand new plane with all new components obsolete, but you accuse me of over reacting?
This is the low in the high/low mix of Russian fighter aircraft is obsolete because it doesn't have an AESA radar yet and is not obviously superior to Rafale in every aspect.
I didn't get the memo telling me every HATO country and every other country sharing a border with Russia is getting Rafales...
You claim I complain from ignorance but you already know how the ROFAR antennas will be constructed... ahem
Of course... the new photonic radars are going to be hand held and made from clothes hangar wire like all good car aerials are...
I just go by what MiG say. Wait, do you suggest the MiG-35 naming is just a cheap PR ploy?
The naming identifies the contents.
MiG-29M is the single seat version of the M2...
Maybe they don't sell so many because the people selling them don't know what they are doing... the single seat version of the MiG-29M2 has the same two seat canopy... the photo shown is the single seat canopy which was used on the MiG-29M from the 1980s but is not used for the single seat MiG-29M2.
What is the difference with MiG-29M? Honest question
Ready to go now as is.
I realise that when the Typhoon and the Rafale and the Gripen and the F-35 all entered service they had all their final ready to go equipment.... newest radars, latest equipment and weapons... but if you stop being a little fanboy and wait till things are ready, perhaps you might be pleasantly surprised.
That has no answer to my question sorry
In the Russian military there are some MiG-29KR and a couple of early test MiG-35s, but all the rest are old model MiG-29s of a different design.
Russian analysis that I have read suggest that would be the case in WVR true. Of course some other technologies like DIRCM have to be considered as well as other kinds of encounter and funtionality, and no I don't agree that MiG-29 or any other fighter can jam enemy AAMs with 100% effectiveness.
Ideal situation with unaware target with no self defence equipment at all and AMRAAM has a hit rate of only 40% if lucky... AAMs are nothing like the hittiles they are made out to be in movies.
That is hardly a merit of the MiG-29 or even apply for most of the export customers.
So the goal of MiG is to design a super fighter superior to the Su-35 and Su-57 and to then get the Russian government to cancel those programmes and just buy MiGs... and that will make export customers happy will it?
The MiG is made to a role and a purpose... demanding it be better than a Rafale or else it is obsolete is stupid... even India can't afford Rafales... what country with less than a billion people could afford it?
Normal take-off weight of the M is 19 tons, remove 5 tons fuel (50% more than old MiG-29) and you have 14 tons empty. We can certainly make no accurate calculations but we can reasonably estimate empty weight of the plane. It seems to be heavy as a F-35 or more and heavier than a F-15C too. Reinforced structure common with the K and extended service life go in that direction too. Service ceiling of 16 km for the 35 instead of 18 km for the older versions are also not giving reason for optimism.
Wow it must be crap if it is 14 tons empty and has a max return weight of 16.5 tons for landing back on a carrier... but then it has a normal take off weight that does not include any ordinance so it is obviously one of those very special planes right?
That is a really weak excuse isn't it? Rafale can be refuelled too.
You are right... putting inflight refuelling equipment on planes is just stupid... when they run out of fuel they should just crash... and then after quite a few have been lost we can bitch and moan about it not having enough flight range even though we never bother using the inflight refuelling probe or any external fuel tanks cause they are just a weak excuse to cover the fact that it is not a big long range plane like a Flanker and was never intended for long range operations... I mean if it was they would have external fuel tanks and an inflight refuelling probe...
It is the good old Zhuk-M
So it is total shit and can't be used in combat against anything any more...
Where is the claim about obsolescence? I just said the performance of the EO suite is unknown.
You are saying this aircraft is obsolescent... despite not knowing so many things about it... you don't even know its dry weight... but it is rubbish.
Unsurprisingly, the platforms developed later have better performance.
The aerodynamics of the western aircraft are ordinary and not better than the MiG-29 let alone the MiG-35.
But those western planes will be fine for shooting down Syrian Su-22s and Libyan planes...
Rafale and Eurofighter have the same size and therefore are the reference platforms against which the MiG needs to be measured. Also F-18 is a reference too.
The Rafale is costing India more than the F-35 is costing any customer... the F-18 is known in the US as the expensive plane but amongst that company it is the cheap one... how about cost effectiveness as a measure because performance figures mean nothing if no one can afford to buy any.
In comparison the MiG-35 is cheap...