mig-35 would be a very good plane to have if 5th gen fighters weren't fielded everywhere.
The MiG-35 would not be the front line fighter operating deep behind enemy lines, it would be the plane defending specific targets and front line units under the cover of the IADS that follows the Russian Army everywhere it goes, so Verba, Tunguska and Pantsir, TOR, BUK, and S-300V4 as well as other systems like Kornet and soon SOSNA (pine) and older systems like SA-13 and ZU23 etc etc and new systems like the new 57mm gun based systems.
It is modern and cheap and able to carry all the new missiles their new aircraft carry... for a fraction of the operational costs of western aircraft.
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.
You say that but the US is putting the F-15 and F-16 back into production because the F-35 is actually bullshit and they are not making any more F-22s... how long before the bubble bursts and America admits it can't afford F-35s and goes back to F-16s instead?
Will Europe ever manage to get a 5th gen fighter into service or will it take 15 years and they end up making 3 different types in tiny numbers making them actually more expensive than F-35s are now...
They don't charge that much for Rafale for fun... it was seriously expensive to make and design and so was Typhoon but no so expensive they could save money by cooperating...
Sure. But it will have a chance against other 5th gen aircraft.
Russia is making 5th gen fighters too... do you think if they make MiG-35s they will retire all their other types?
The MiG-35 is the numbers fighter and is supposed to be the new Frontal Aviation fighter to support the troops with guided air to surface munitions and be able to monitor the enemy territory for artillery and vehicles moving on the ground... something they could use right now.... and of course able to defend itself from enemy air defences and indeed engage enemy air defences too.
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.
The L band radar in the wing of the Su-35 and Su-57 operates in frequencies the F-22 and F-35 can't even detect and should be able to detect those aircraft at significant distances... and there are plenty of other assets on the Russian side that will be looking for air threats and passing on that information to other platforms to engage.
Operating near the front lines the S-300V4 should detect enemy stealth aircraft... it is designed to shoot down ballistic targets with a radar cross section of 0.02m so it should be able to spot most stealth targets out to extended ranges... especially targets not flying directly at the system.
Same what is happening with su-35+r-37 against ukro mig-29. The technological difference is so huge that they stand no chance.
There is zero technological difference between a MiG-35 and an Su-35... they both have avionics of the same generation... that is based on systems used in their 5th gen aircraft.
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.
Not many stealthy aircraft can carry that many missiles and if they fire that many they are unarmed now.
MiG-35s have a full EW self defence avionics suite and can use towed jammers and jamming pods and all sorts of other equipment to defeat enemy missiles.
It can also carry the newest air to air missiles including the new ones designed for internal carriage on their new stealthy types of fighters and bombers (the PAK DA will use self defence AAMs for shooting down long range missile types like AMRAAM etc).
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.
Every upgrade of the MIG-29 added more fuel capacity, in fact the T in SMT is fuel. The MiG-35 uses sealed internal spaces that can all contain fuel without needing a bladder or fuel tank to be added... which massively increases its fuel capacity and keeps weight low.
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.
To store weapons internally the aircraft has to be fatter which means higher drag whether it is carrying weapons or not.
Why would they produce it if no one buys it ?
Russia is buying MiG-35s at a low rate because they want to see how affordable the next gen light fighter is going to be.
If it is a dog like the F-35 and is very expensive to keep stealthy because of the coatings needed every flight then it makes sense to produce a few hundred MiG-35s and rather less if any 5th gen light fighters... the heavy 5th gen fighters are more expensive but also more capable so the extra cost is worth it, while expensive light fighters... well light does not mean weight... light means cheap numbers fighter so if it is not cheap then you need a 4++ gen light fighter... the MIG-35 for your numbers aircraft and use stealthy heavy planes to deal with enemy forces.
If the new MiG light 5th gen fighter is capable and cheap then they might not make a lot of MiG-35s and they can just make an all stealthy light fighter which will be enormously valuable for a range of roles because it will combine low operating costs with the advantages of stealth and new avionics.
The point is that new avionics for the new 5th gen fighters as well as engines and radar can be installed in the 4++ gen fighters for better commonality and standardisation as they become affordable over time.
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.
India said they didn't want an all Russian air fleet... MiG was always going to be rejected... they wanted to licence build the Mirage 2000 and when France refused they created the competition that the french fighter was rigged to win because they wanted a french fighter but they also wanted them to drop the price and they didn't... complete waste of time and money, but in the end the Russian military get MiG-29Ks and MiG-35s so they wont be complaining.
They bought a token amount of MiG-35s while MiG were waiting for the Su-57 to get into serial production.
Funding for the light 5th gen fighter was suspended until the heavy 5th gen fighter was in serial production so now MiG should be getting funding for their new light 5th gen fighter we saw a model of.
Funding for the MIG-35 should have helped keep them working on new technology for the light 5th gen fighter with technologies they can share between the two types like the Su-35 and Su-57 shared technology as the latter was being developed.
When MiG gets its new light fighter flying and tested they can look at its performance and compare it with the MiG-35 in terms of cost effectiveness and decide whether to go all light stealth or mix of each or all MiG-35 depending on effectiveness.
Keep in mind the stealthy Commanche was cancelled because most of the time it isn't radar that will be destroying them but TOR and Tunguska in optical mode and of course Verba and soon Sosna using IR and laser beam riding technology neither of which stealth is effective against.
There is no room for the mig-35.
There is room for a cheap light fighter... the question is whether they can make a stealthy light fighter that can be as affordable as a MiG-35 so it can be used in useful numbers or not... if they can then there is no need for MiG-35s, but if they can't or if the stealth makes no difference in the missions they are intending their light fighters to perform then it might be a case of buying a mix of the two because they are both cheap enough to use widely and numbers will make them more effective than a slightly better platform that is expensive... or a plane like the F-35 that is probably worse yet also horrendously expensive.
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.
They have only just resumed funding if their promises are to be believed... there wont be a Checkmate before 2030 and I would expect a MiG by then too but then they have to evaluate the performances and real world costs... are they to not have light fighters till then?
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.
It is funny that so many members bleat about the MiG-35 not having enough electrical power to properly run an AESA radar and recommend a better solution of a single engined fighter... why do you think removing an engine will improve the power available for the radar?
Do you honestly think removing 9 tons of thrust from the aircraft will improve performance and boost available power levels.
Why not take one engine out of the Rafale... why wont that help its performance too surely...
The MiG-35 is ready to produce... it will have things to work on... every new plane does, but removing an engine would require a complete redesign.... they already have a single engined light fighter designed from scratch to be stealthy so WTF would they piss around removing an engine from a MiG-35 to make another type again... why are you being so stupid?
They already proposed single engined fighters for the MiG-29 job in the 1970s and it was REJECTED... since then all the single engined fighters and strike aircraft have been withdrawn from service... the only single engined aircraft they are contemplating are the Yak-152 and the Baikal light aircraft...
Now this light 5th gen fighter project they have a single engined competitor but why piss around with the MiG-35 which is ready and in production now just to satisfy people on the internet.
Do you go to threads on the Rafale and Typhoon and complain that they are good but could be better if you take out an engine...?
They have datalinks. One f-35 scan the air the others keep their radars turned off.
The Russian planes have datalinks too and the big Russian planes that will be hunting F-35s have wing mounted L band radars that operate in the same wavelength as HATO datalinks.... accident? Don't think so.
NEBO is used for tracking stealth targets and it combines three different radar antenna to combine the signal and use computer processing to extract data using all the advantages of each radar type and to eliminate the draw backs of each frequency range to operate rather better than any of the three radars could manage on their own...
Do you think the Su-57 and Su-35 might do the same with their Ku and Ka band nose mounted radar and wing mounted L band radar and their IRSTs.
With meteors they will be shooting those migs 200km away.
How many can they carry in stealthy mode... four?
The MiG-35 could carry four R-37Ms and still have four pylons free for R-77s or R-73s or other ordinance... and a centreline pod with towed jammer decoys.
That f-35 using its radar will be quite safe and could turn off its radar after few seconds to evade some potential missiles.
Turning it on once would reveal its presence to everyone... turning it off wont help.
Facing su-75 they would need to come much closer and both would be withing missile range of the other.
While those F-35s are trying to hunt MiG-35s and Su-75s operating over the front lines what do you think Su-57s and Su-35s will be doing... other that shooting down HATO support aircraft.... do you think the wing mounted L band AESAs are for fun?
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.
An AWACS turns on its radar anywhere near the front line and Russian aircraft will be zoom climbing to launch an R-37M at it... 400km range missiles...
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.
Iskander comes with a cluster warhead option with 650kgs of cluster munitions... I would expect the ground cratering munitions would be used to penetrate hangars and runways alike...
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.
They give the radar detection range for export Su-35s... the domestic models performance would be secret wouldn't it?
And their advances in thermal imaging means long and medium and short wave IR sensors have led to dramatic increases in range for detection of air targets... the long wave IR sensor on the F-16 could actually detect a MiG-29 at greater ranges than its radar of the time could detect it... a high flying super cruising F-22 would be a nice hot juicy target...
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.
As we have found Army IADS are pretty solid so your best chance with HIMARS is soft civilian targets most of the time, but the range of the S-300V4 and very soon the S-500 will mean HATO planes wont be able to operate very close to the front line at all... how will that effect their ability to support their forces on the ground?
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.
What will an F-35 pilot do, he will be detected at very long range by L band radar and will get long range AAMs fired at him and also the AWACS aircraft behind him he thinks he is protecting... he will get shot down before the AWACS aircraft as neither aircraft is capable of pulling the 8g needed to evade an R-37M.
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.
They did the same to the Ukrainian Su-27s and will do the same to HATO donated aircraft as well...
The MiG-35 is the same generation as the Su-35 and apart from being smaller and lighter and cheaper it can actually fly faster and accelerate cheaper because it is lighter and smaller.
Stealth + long range radar + long range missiles is a quite good tool.
And the Russians are in the process of introducing new light fighters of 4++ and 5 types and both MiG and Sukhoi also have their own wingman drones so they have all bases covered... the R-37M is actually an aging missile and its replacement is getting ready for introduction... it is designed specifically for internal carriage by fighters and bombers. The object 815 will have greater range and be able to be carried internally in the new 5th gen fighters and also the PAK DA apparently.
New small self defence air to air missiles are also being developed to defend aircraft from enemy launched long range AAMs and SAMs.
It is not Russia that should be worried... everything is going to plan.
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.
The story we were given a decade ago was that they were suspending the light 5th gen fighter programme and funding until the heavy 5th gen fighter programme reached serial production levels... that is happening now so presumably funding has started and MiG will be developing their model in secret while the Sukhoi backup model is offered for export. The production of half a dozen MiG-35s is for export potential but also to keep MiG working on new technologies they can apply to a 4++ gen fighter (MiG-35) and their new light 5th gen fighter and carrier based fighter, presumably both now being funded.
When it comes time to test they will evaluate the new single engined MiG against the MiG-35 whose designs it makes sense to unify as far as possible... new high thrust engines can be used on both and new radar can be used on both.... they might end up producing both in numbers or one or the other depending on how stealthy the light 5th gen fighter can be made while still being affordable.
If it can't be made cheap and stealthy then MiG-35s with new 12 ton thrust engines and super AESA radars could be their numbers fighter, but of course if they can make a single engined 5th gen stealth fighter for about 40 million that costs less than 8K per flight hour then why not make that your standard numbers fighter and not worry about the MiG-35.
It all depends on what they can manage.
Ground based radars have too many dead zones to be always helpful.
The only deadzones for the radar they used just outside Moscow to detect US F-35s flying on the Iranian border is the first 1,000km, which is why they tend to be installed over 1,000km from their international borders so the dead space is inside Russian territory.
Radars set further in or looking sideways can be used for target inside Russian airspace if needed.
No drag with internal weapon bays. Mig-35 will have reduced range with external stuff.
Internal weapons storage means bigger fuselage which means more drag all the time whether you are carrying weapons or not.
Drop tanks can be used for the first part of the trip and droped.
Drop tanks are carried on external pylons which don't drop with the tank and increase the radar cross section of the aircraft after the tanks are dropped.
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.
The wing mounted radar on the Su-35 and Su-57 are not effected by shape and the coatings on aircraft are too thin to effect wavelengths that long so detection range for stealth aircraft is similar for non stealth aircraft... and actually very good.
Meteors are active radar homing missiles and can be defeated using a range of methods including towed jammers and decoys.
Numbers of a-50 is quite low. Even less modern a-50U and a-100.
Numbers of F-22s very low too and talk of retiring them because they are expensive to operate. F-35 expensive to operate too and new European stealth fighter may not eventually arrive intact... more likely the coalition will break up and each will make 200 perhaps of their own stealth aircraft each costing more per airframe than the F-35 will.
It's pretty hard to know that an ARH missile is fly at you.
MiG-35 has similar avionics to the Su-35... possibly better.
Meteor is a very long range missile. That's why they integrated r-37M on su-35.
R-37M can reach 400km, and its replacement for the Su-57 but for all their new fighters eventually can reach even further... and maybe ramjet or scramjet powered.
Not really. Nato airports have pretty long and large runways and a fighter needs roughly 1000m of it. Hole can be repaired quickly.
Soviet cratering submunitions have a rocket powered spike that digs up to 10m into concrete and then explodes to undermine the foundations of the surface.
They can also be dropped on hardened aircraft shelters punching though 10m of protection and concrete and then exploding inside...
It's an afghan airport.
They would be following HATO rules for parking and movement surely...
Before it comes to 90km to detect the f-22 it will have to face those amraams.
AMRAAM has a 40% kill probability against unaware 3rd and 4th gen fighters with little in the way of self defence.
4++ and 5th gen fighters should fare better.
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.
So the F-22 and teh AWACS wont know a MiG-31 350km away has launched R-37Ms at them then...
And those big numbers of refuelling planes and AWACS aircraft... when the first few explode will they take advantage of their numbers and just keep replacing them or will they withdraw them all to safer distances rendering their numbers advantage bloody useless?
Russia would have ground radars but they are far more impacted by ground obstacles.
Only if you operate your aircraft at very low altitudes... and AWACS is useless at very low altitudes.
They could be safe above their SAMs but won't be able to go outside the zone.
MiG-35s will be frontal aviation aircraft and will spend the vast majority of their time over their own friendly forces using their radar and IRST and targeting pods to find enemy targets like MLRS launchers and artillery and of course also engaging enemy air defence systems too, while operating under the Armys IADS of Verba, Tunguska, TOR, BUK, and Viking and S-300V4 and soon also 2S38 and Pine and Kornet-EM etc etc.
Meteor is a ramjet missile powered all the way. Its NOZ is way greater than actual missiles.
Yep, hot exhaust all the way to the target showing up nicely on IRST and DAS.
Meteor has small control fins and being powered allows it to retain speed well but it still has to go very fast to remain airborne and its small control surfaces limit its ability to turn.
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.
Most of the time the R-37M will be used to take out AWACS and JSTARS and inflight refuelling aircraft... if an F-22 is detected via wing mounted L band radar the Su-35 will likely just keep a look at it and use its IRST to find it and close in on it and use its superior manouver performance and IR guided missiles to take it out.... which is why the R-27ET is still carried...
The dwindling number of F-22s around the place probably wont be a big problem for a lot longer as they are simply too expensive to operate and will likely be retired so they can afford to start making F-16s again.
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.
Few missiles can outturn a plane, but most of the time a towed jammer or chaff or decoys can be used... both the MIG-35 and Su-35 have a range of onboard systems to defend from enemy weapons.
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.
A high flying missile with a burning ramjet motor is going to stand out against the sky in an IRST sensor window whose field of view is designed to look up and down and left to right over a wide field of view to track targets during a turning dogfight...
Stealth is important. 4th gen fighter can't compete especially since they also have avionics and electronics few generation older than 5th gen aircraft.
Funny you say that because Sukhoi paired its development with the Su-35 so as technology for the Su-57 matures it gets retrofitted to teh Su-35 that the Russian AF uses to reduce costs and increase commonality across the fleet and I rather suspect MiG will do the same with their MiG-35 and new single engined fighter of the 5th gen.
It makes testing much faster and upgrades the fleet faster too if you can put it into your 4++ gen fighter for testing and when it works deploy it across the fleet of both generations.
Sometimes a slightly down graded model for the older generation to make it more affordable but for example the Su-35 have the wing mounted L band stealthy plane detection AESA radar... and it is being added to the Su-30 to effectively make the Su-30 into a two seat Su-35.
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.
Sukhoi presents the Su-75 because it is not a funded Russian military programme, the MIG is, which is why it is secret.
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.
But when it does detect it then the Su-35 system detects the pulse and can direct L band radar waves in that direction to find the F-22 and because L band is too long to be effected by shaping on a stealth aircraft it bounces back from the entire aircraft like it was a block of metal... and the Su-35 now knows where the F-22 is and can change position and alert other aircraft around the place.
BTW they are operating over the battlefield where S-300V4s will be based... S-300V4s can engage ballistic warhead targets with a RCS of 0.02m so an F-22 might be in trouble there...
F-22s will launch all their missiles before the su-35s detects them.
F-22s carry 6 missiles, Su-35 can carry 14 who is going to run out first and when they both run out and it comes down to guns who will win?
They are called MISSiles for a reason.
The AIM-9X was called a hittile because it uses an imaging seeker and you can lock on to a specific part of the aircraft to hit like the cockpit... except a Syrian Su-22 defeated one using standard flares...
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.
Doesn't that work both ways so the side with the longest range missiles will win.... Russia wins.
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.
Sounds amazing... so why in real world combat against third and fourth gen fighters that are unaware they are under attack because they lack decent EW equipment the AMRAAM only has a 40% kill rate?
Wouldn't it be much worse against a 4++ or 5th gen enemy fighter?
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.
They use an anti stealth L band radar in the wing to narrow the search area...
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.
The Su-30 is a two seat Su-27 and was a bargain basement two seat aircraft with no frills so of course the MiGs are comparable in price, but the Su-30MK2 and Su-30MKI are vastly more expensive than the MiG-29 otherwise the Indians would have stopped buying MiG-29s and just replaced them all with Flankers.
A MiG-29 is half the operational costs of a Flanker and an SMT is even cheaper. The MiG-35 is also less than half the operational cost of a Su-35 which is why they bought any at all.
If the light fighter is expensive then it makes no sense to have any at all but it is operational costs that matter because over the life of an aircraft they are vastly more than the purchase price of the aircraft.
I thought it had a solid fuel ramjet, thus making it non throttleable.
AFAIK solid fuel ramjets use a powder mixed with incoming air to burn... sort of like a rocket that only burns when the airflow is coming through the fuel area to provide oxygen for the combustion.
The Russians make scramjet engines which should be orders of magnitude more efficient and effective for air to air missile design.
A weapon like the 260km range Kh-31 anti ship and Anti radiation missiles flying at mach 3.5 could be devastating flying three or four times faster... flying at mach 3.5 for 260km... well lets say mach 3 for the 260km because a solid rocket booster to get it moving and then climb to altitude and then fly all the way to the target, so mach 3 is 320m/s times three which gives us a flight speed of 960m/s should mean about 271 seconds to reach the target at 960m/s.
So replace the ramjet with a scramjet that can operate at speeds of 3km per second then with a similar amount of fuel operating for a similar amount of time of 270 seconds that would give a flight range of 810km.
That sounds about right if you think that the Zircon fuel put into the Onyx missile increased the Onyx missiles flight speed from mach 2.5 to mach 5 and its range from 400km to over 800km... mach 2.5 is 800m/s so it would take 500 seconds to travel 400km so moving at double that speed for the same amount of time gives you double the 400km range.... which is 800km plus...