MRCA News and Discussion

R Arun · Post by **R Arun** » 19 Aug 2009 20:31

guys what are the chances of SU35 getting in the competition considering it will be cheaper then FA-18E/F

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Aug 2009 20:48

R Arun wrote:guys what are the chances of SU35 getting in the competition considering it will be cheaper then FA-18E/F

from:

Feb, 2009 :: Sukhoi confirms Su-35 deliveries to Russian Air Force in 2011

this:

The company is expecting to export at least 160 Su-35 fighters in the future to a number of countries, including India, Malaysia and Algeria.

IF that is true, then of the 160 (or so) ONLY India can afford a chunk of them. Say 110?

IF THAT is true, then why mess Su-35 with MRCA? Russians would love to sell 126 MiG-35s + 110 Su-35s.

--------------------------------------------------------------

Just curious. Any idea how many Su-35s will the RuAF absorb?

At this rate seems like IAF will become Sukhois biggest client!!!!!!!!!

added l8r:

Found the answer to my question:

Aug, 2009 :: Sukhoi in a record deal for supply of fighters to the Russian Air Force new

Moscow: Russia's ministry of defence and the Sukhoi Joint Stock Company on Tuesday signed a 80 billion ruble ($2.5 billion) contract for the supply of 64 Sukhoi-series fighters to the Russian Air Force, the Russian prime minister, Vladimir Putin said.

Under the contract signed at the MAKS-2009 air show at Zhukovsky outside Moscow, the Russian Air Force will be supplied with 48 Su-35S, 12 Su-27SM and four Su-30M2 fighter jets.

Hmmmmmmmmmmm.....................

So, ................... RuAF gets ONLY 48 4++ gen birds?

Even THAT is NOT a serious buy.

This FGFA better not be merged at the hip to the PAK-FA at this rate.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Aug 2009 21:17

And, sorry to add, the $2.5 Billion deal does NOT include a single MiG-35. Yet.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 19 Aug 2009 21:45

today's headline at Boeing's website 'inside dot boeing dot com' states

"F/A-18F sets new speed record in India" and carries a picture of a F/A-18F taking off from the B'lore runway with wing tip Sidewinders and what appears to be dummy AMRAAMs and some small bombs (apparently taken at Yelahanka during AI 09)

A Boeing-leased U.S. Navy F/A-18F set a new Super Hornet speed record in Bangalore Monday, during the opening day of flight evaluations in India’s highly coveted 126 aircraft Medium Multi-Role Combat Aircraft (MMRCA) competition.

The Super Hornet, flown by Boeing F/A-18 pilot Mike "Sting" Wallace and Weapons Systems Officer U.S. Navy Lt. Cmdr. Michael "Spock" Chenoweth of VFA 122, hit a speed of 1.84 Mach, shattering the previous record of 1.76 Mach.

"Up in the control tower, they were looking (at the radar screens) in disbelief as it was happening," said Bret Marks, the F/A-18 program manager for India. "We were confident that when we got here we’d impress the Indian Air Force with the capabilities of the Super Hornet and setting a new speed record with the first flight set the stage."

Boeing Tech Fellow, Mike Heller, who persuaded the team it was possible, said India provided a rare chance to do a speed run.

"The engines perform best in the coldest air," said Heller. "And the air is coldest at 50,000 feet nearest the equator."

Besides Boeing, the other contenders are Lockheed Martin (F-16), EADS (Eurofighter), Saab (Gripen), Dassault (Rafale) and Mikoyan (MIG-35).

Boeing will wrap up its India based phase of the flight trials on August 28 after flying in hot desert conditions in Jaisalmer and the cold high altitude environment of the Himalayas.

the other headline is "Jim Albaugh meets with Congressional leaders in Brazil".

So, Boeing is really going at it to get these 2 mega deals.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 19 Aug 2009 21:51

Raosaar,

You may have a point. MiG might have thrown in the towel. Not cause the Sokol plant chief said so (because there is already a line running at the other plant - Lukhovtsky? and they can surely get 35s in there after the Ks are done). thats not an issue. The problem is that I still don't see the real 35s - the new airframe. same old bort 154 running around still. that might be an indication.

CM.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Aug 2009 21:57

They claimed a few days ago that they were testing a plane for the Indian MRCA deal. So, that should not be an issue I would think.

Whatever, IMVVVHO, THE issue is got to be the "5th Gen" plane. Call it what you may - PAK-FA, FGFA, whatever - BUT that entity cannot "fail" in ANY way - technically, financially, etc.

I can care to hoots for the MRCA or even the Su-35. A lack of a Russian 5th gen will spell real trouble all around.

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Aug 2009 22:18

NRao wrote:And, sorry to add, the $2.5 Billion deal does NOT include a single MiG-35. Yet.

May be thats reserved for MAKS 11

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2009 22:18

Cain Marko wrote:Raosaar,

You may have a point. MiG might have thrown in the towel. Not cause the Sokol plant chief said so (because there is already a line running at the other plant - Lukhovtsky? and they can surely get 35s in there after the Ks are done). thats not an issue. The problem is that I still don't see the real 35s - the new airframe. same old bort 154 running around still. that might be an indication.

CM.

IIRC every contender has to bring 2 jets to the trials. The russians know this and they will be the third contender to go through the trials (after the teens). If they did not have another airframe ready or nearly ready they would have just withdrawn. Since they haven't we can safely assume that there will be 2 Mig-35 prototypes flying by the time its their turn to show up in bangalore.

I'm no Mig-35 fan but I don't think the fact that the RuAF has ignored the Mig-35 would affect the MRCA trials in a major way. They never bought the Su-30 either AFAIK.

naird · Post by **naird** » 19 Aug 2009 22:33

Boeing will wrap up its India based phase of the flight trials on August 28 after flying in hot desert conditions in Jaisalmer and the cold high altitude environment of the Himalayas.

Aug 28 ...thats a pretty fast evaluation .......Have to see what solah will do to impress IAF.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 19 Aug 2009 22:53

Just out of curiosity, what do the frontline Air Forces of the respective nations fly?

I think USAF still flies F-16s and F-15s, and USN flies F/A-18s, though the F-22 and F-35 are coming in "soon".
Who if anyone flies SAAB Gripen? EF Toofan? Rafale?
What are the frontline twin-engine fighters of UQ, Frogistan, Hunistan and Russia?

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 19 Aug 2009 22:59

Some bad news from MiG alley:

It seems phaza (the co. that makes the Zhuk-A scheduled for the 35) is in trouble financially and may not be able to do the MiG-29 Baaz upgrade of the IAF. This is NOT good news imho. Unless of course, MiG goes with NIIP and their new AESA. Let us see.

CM.

KrishG · Post by **KrishG** » 19 Aug 2009 23:08

narayanan wrote:Just out of curiosity, what do the frontline Air Forces of the respective nations fly?

I think USAF still flies F-16s and F-15s, and USN flies F/A-18s, though the F-22 and F-35 are coming in "soon".
Who if anyone flies SAAB Gripen? EF Toofan? Rafale?
What are the frontline twin-engine fighters of UQ, Frogistan, Hunistan and Russia?

Germany, UK and Spain all use EF as their frontline fighter aircraft.
China uses J-11 Flankers as it's frontline fighter.
Russia uses the Su-27 flankers and some of it's derivatives with Su-35 being the newest.

Surya · Post by **Surya** » 19 Aug 2009 23:14

CM - well on the positive side

The faster this decrepit support\logistic system collapses the better. I do not want to sign on to this and 8 months later find a Gorshkov deal all over again. I would have wished it earlier.

Better it die now.

It will also spur our guys to focus more on developing our private military industrial omplex.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2009 23:22

Surya wrote:CM - well on the positive side

The faster this decrepit support\logistic system collapses the better. I do not want to sign on to this and 8 months later find a Gorshkov deal all over again. I would have wished it earlier.

Better it die now.

It will also spur our guys to focus more on developing our private military industrial omplex.

But it may stall our Mig-29 upgrade. No matter what aircraft is chosen for the MRCA those 50 odd 29s in service have to be upgraded. They are still our frontline interceptors.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 19 Aug 2009 23:23

Surya,

That is one thing India does not have to worry about as we post - IMHO.

By now everything should be exposed. India has had enough time to get to know these things.

Besides one real give away is the Russian MoD funding. I do not think RU has much private funding to lean on.

Even on exporting the Su-35 to India, on some more thought, I would think India would rather use techs as an upgrade to the MKI (when possible) or buy more MKIs rather than buy the Su-35 itself. In that light I can see India increasing to get a total of 300 MKIs. (Besides the MKI itself has a ton of potential. The curve is still going up.)

Notice that the RuMoD has some funds for a: Tupolev aircraft maker to develop Russia's new strategic bomber at MAKS. But, for such a huge AF these are very small funds I would think. Pity them.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 19 Aug 2009 23:29

narayanan wrote:Just out of curiosity, what do the frontline Air Forces of the respective nations fly?

I think USAF still flies F-16s and F-15s, and USN flies F/A-18s, though the F-22 and F-35 are coming in "soon".

Saar the teens are getting long in tooth for the USAF and they intend to dump them rather than upgrade to uber MRCA status such F-16blk60 or F-15S/K. they already have close to 100 F22s and will have a prod run till 180 odd raptors. May upgrade F-15s with AESA. Have decided to drop the F-16 totally Seem to be relying on the JSF.
Re USN, the last I checked there was squabbling about the F-18E/F in Kangress. OB wants to do in both shornet and f-22 production and focus on the JSF. But shornet will probly hang around perhaps as a fall back for the USAF.

Who if anyone flies SAAB Gripen? EF Toofan? Rafale?

GripenNG? no one so far although Sweden intends to buy them. Gripen C - plenty of chota- chota customers including Sweden, THailand, S.AFrika, Hungary, Czech Rep. Toofan - RAF, Luftwafer, Italiy, Spain?, Saudi; Rafale - France Adla and Aeronavale.

What are the frontline twin-engine fighters of UQ, Frogistan, Hunistan and Russia?

UQ as of now: EF-2000 and Tornado, Future = EF-2000 and JSF
Frogs: Rafale and M2k, Future = Rafale
Roosi: Assorted variety of Flankers/Foxhounds/Frogfoots/Fulcrums. Future: Super Flankers/Foxhounds to continue with fullbacks and Pakfas
Hunistan: Su-27s, Su-30s (300 odd a/c), 100 odd J10s, assorted knockoffs of roosi birds. (J8, J7 etc). Future = Chinistealth, J11s, J10s.

CM.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 19 Aug 2009 23:30

France uses Mirage 2000s from 1980s vintage for nuclear-armed strike forces, but the recent orders have all been for Rafales - 120 on order!

UQ RAF has EF
Luftwaffe - 140 EF
Italy - 75 EF

What is the difference between a MiG 35 and a Su-35? They look exactly the same externally!

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2009 23:33

narayanan wrote:France uses Mirage 2000s from 1980s vintage for nuclear-armed strike forces, but the recent orders have all been for Rafales - 120 on order!

UQ RAF has EF
Luftwaffe - 140 EF
Italy - 75 EF

What is the difference between a MiG 35 and a Su-35? They look exactly the same externally!

Hardly sir! For one thing the SU-35 is much larger, has more powerful engines, greater payload, huge range with internal fuel, larger radar etc. etc.

Su-35

* Max takeoff weight: 34,500 kg (76,060 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Saturn 117S turbofans
o Dry thrust: 8,800 kgf[10] (86.3 kN, 19,400 lbf) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 14,500 kgf (142 kN, 31,900 lbf) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 2.35[6] (2,500 km/h,[8] 1,500 mph) at altitude
* Range: 3,600 km (1,940 nmi) ; (1,580 km, 850 nmi near ground level)
* Ferry range: 4,500 km (2,430 nmi) with external fuel tanks
* Service ceiling: 18,000 m (59,100 ft)
* Rate of climb: >325 m/s (>64,100 ft/min)
* Wing loading: 408 kg/m² (84.9 lb/ft²)
* Thrust/weight: 1.14

Mig-35
General characteristics

* Max takeoff weight: 29,700 kg (50,076 lb)
* Powerplant: 2× Klimov RD-33MK afterburning turbofans
o Dry thrust: 5,400 kgf, 53.0 kN (11,900 lbf) each
o Thrust with afterburner: 9,000 kgf, 88.3 kN (19,800 lbf) each

Performance

* Maximum speed: Mach 2.25 (2,400 km/h, 1,491 mph) at altitude
* Range: 2,000 km (1,240 mi)
* Ferry range: 3,100 km (1,930 mi) with 3 external fuel tanks
* Service ceiling: 17,500 m (57,400 ft)
* Rate of climb: 330 m/s (65,000 ft/min)
* Thrust/weight: 1.14

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Aug 2009 23:42

I think those data are from wiki , the 29,700 kg MTOW is incorrect , though real data is hard to come by , but the MTOW should not be more than Mig-29K + 500 Kg.

nachiket · Post by **nachiket** » 19 Aug 2009 23:44

Austin wrote:I think those data are from wiki , the 29,700 kg MTOW is incorrect , though real data is hard to come by , but the MTOW should not be more than Mig-29K + 500 Kg.

Yes its from wiki. Sorry I should have mentioned the source. I did think the diff in MTOW between Mig-35 and SU-35 looked rather small. Couldn't find any other source though. airforce-technology lists the same MTOW

shanksinha · Post by **shanksinha** » 19 Aug 2009 23:46

Wow. So much hatred. Where does all this come from....

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 19 Aug 2009 23:58

nachiket wrote: Yes its from wiki. Sorry I should have mentioned the source. I did think the diff in MTOW between Mig-35 and SU-35 looked rather small. Couldn't find any other source though. airforce-technology lists the same MTOW

I see , all faithfully copy and pasted from Ria Novosti , Mig-35 specs

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Aug 2009 00:02

nachiket wrote:
Cain Marko wrote:Raosaar,

You may have a point. MiG might have thrown in the towel. Not cause the Sokol plant chief said so (because there is already a line running at the other plant - Lukhovtsky? and they can surely get 35s in there after the Ks are done). thats not an issue. The problem is that I still don't see the real 35s - the new airframe. same old bort 154 running around still. that might be an indication.

CM.
IIRC every contender has to bring 2 jets to the trials. The russians know this and they will be the third contender to go through the trials (after the teens). If they did not have another airframe ready or nearly ready they would have just withdrawn. Since they haven't we can safely assume that there will be 2 Mig-35 prototypes flying by the time its their turn to show up in bangalore.

I'm no Mig-35 fan but I don't think the fact that the RuAF has ignored the Mig-35 would affect the MRCA trials in a major way. They never bought the Su-30 either AFAIK.

the problem with the final definitive MiG-35 prototype not showing up at MAKS 2009 is that it indicates that Bort # 154 is likely the MiG-35 as of now alongwith another similar modified MiG-29M2. and that will NOT impress the IAF.

it still has the small AESA array, still doesn't feature the wing changes and externally is almost similar to the MiG-29K of the IN..if avionics on offer for the MRCA are not yet integrated at the time of flight testing, how is it to be evaluated ? simply take them on their words or extrapolate ?

and if this final prototype is still not fully integrated with offered avionics , it means additional time, and money to be spent on the same, which is most likely why the MiG-35 cannot be ready for delivery anytime before 2014 as per the MiG official..

funding will be another issue. engineering work is not cheap and MiGs finances are in doldrums with Sukhoi taking all orders from RuAF.

the fact that the MiG-35 is supposed to be in India, in less than a month really means that they're making a big mess of this unless they bring the definitive MiG-35 to the trials..unless MiG is testing at a breakneck speed in secret, I'm afraid we're going to see the same story- MiG-29M2 dressed up as MiG-35, with the final MiG-35 variant only seen on models or drawings, with quite a bit of work yet to be done, and to be funded by its launch customer.

just hearing Zelin say that MiG-35s will be ordered makes no difference- the timing of the announcement conveniently coincides with the beginning of flight trials, but the order announced at MAKS 2009 went to Su-35s and Su-30s only. as they say, the proof of the pudding lies in eating it..simply saying that the pudding is tasty and we'll order it in the future while spending your money on another cake, shows that this is just to make the MiG-35 seem more attractive and show that its backed by the RuAF.

Sontu · Post by **Sontu** » 20 Aug 2009 00:05

Negative Impact of F-18 E/F 's IRST mounted on External Fuel Tank

Can some guru analyse and let us know the penalties(minuses) that F-18s will have to suffer due to it's proposed IRST will be munted on it's centerline external fuel tank ?

I would assume this approach will add following issues/problems to F-18's flight and combat capabilities.

1. F-18's will have to always carry the Centerline Fuel Tank which houses the IRST.

2. This approach of F-18 E/F carrying a Centerline Fuel tank always, even during an arial combat will have a negative impact on F-18's manuverability, acceelaration (due to increased drag )and hence chances of it's survibility during an air combat will be very less.

3. This approach will increase the RSC singnature of F-18 hugely as Centerline Tank is a quite huge object with largest diameter, carried by any combat aircraft( espetially think when today's combat aircraft designers are trying to hide the AAMs and other ammunitions which have lesser diameter and trying to carry in Internal bays even thay are using retarctable Fuel probes to reduce the Radar signature ).

I am surprised why US designers have taken this approach while considering an IRST is quite low weight item with 80-100 Kg range and US is technologically good at Miniaturing avionics items,they could easily intigrated with main fusalage like any other combat planes ? that to when they consider soo much about RCS impact of canopy,fighter seat and other hardware inside the cockpit.
Regards,

Austin · Post by **Austin** » 20 Aug 2009 00:06

I dont think thats really a problem as there is no F-16IN that exist and they are getting F-16 Block 60 of UAE AFAIK.

I think if the SMT/M2 meets the criteria of IAF then with Mig-35 it just gets better or else its end of road for Mig-35 , Mig must be aware of this quite well so they must be confident that this bird they are sending will meet or slightly exceed the specs.

Sanku · Post by **Sanku** » 20 Aug 2009 00:07

The lack of appearance at MAKs does not mean much -- It could quite easily be taken to mean that they are hiding the cards under the chest right now and doing all that is possible for the Indian show.

Sigh... when will our speculations end. Bring it on, bring it on bring it on....

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 20 Aug 2009 00:13

Kartik wrote:the problem with the final definitive MiG-35 prototype not showing up at MAKS 2009 is that it indicates that Bort # 154 is likely the MiG-35 as of now alongwith another similar modified MiG-29M2. and that will NOT impress the IAF.

it still has the small AESA array, still doesn't feature the wing changes and externally is almost similar to the MiG-29K of the IN..if avionics on offer for the MRCA are not yet integrated at the time of flight testing, how is it to be evaluated ? simply take them on their words or extrapolate ?

and if this final prototype is still not fully integrated with offered avionics , it means additional time, and money to be spent on the same, which is most likely why the MiG-35 cannot be ready for delivery anytime before 2014 as per the MiG official..

funding will be another issue. engineering work is not cheap and MiGs finances are in doldrums with Sukhoi taking all orders from RuAF.

the fact that the MiG-35 is supposed to be in India, in less than a month really means that they're making a big mess of this unless they bring the definitive MiG-35 to the trials..unless MiG is testing at a breakneck speed in secret, I'm afraid we're going to see the same story- MiG-29M2 dressed up as MiG-35, with the final MiG-35 variant only seen on models or drawings, with quite a bit of work yet to be done, and to be funded by its launch customer.

just hearing Zelin say that MiG-35s will be ordered makes no difference- the timing of the announcement conveniently coincides with the beginning of flight trials, but the order announced at MAKS 2009 went to Su-35s and Su-30s only. as they say, the proof of the pudding lies in eating it..simply saying that the pudding is tasty and we'll order it in the future while spending your money on another cake, shows that this is just to make the MiG-35 seem more attractive and show that its backed by the RuAF.

I would have thought that they might've made a deal with the IN to let 'em use a couple of MiG-29Ks for the job. The K is almost completely the same as the 35, so they could've slightly modified it (taken away the carrier gear and extra flaps, added the zhuk-a) and perhaps used it for the trials. What had me going were reports that they have some kind of prototype around that was just beginning testing and would land up in INdia in october.

CM.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 20 Aug 2009 00:15

Sontu wrote:Impact of F-18 E/F 's IRST mounted on External Fuel Tank

Can some guru analyse and let us know the penalties(minuses) that F-18s will have to suffer due to it's proposed IRST will be munted on it's centerline external fuel tank ?

I would asume this apprach will add following issues/problems to F-18's flight and combat capabilities.

1. F-18's will have to always carry the Centerline Fuel Tank which houses the IRST.
2. This approach ofF-18 E/F carrying a Centerline Fuel tank always, even during an arial combat will have a negative impact on F-18's manuverability, acceelaration (due to increased drag )and hence chances of it's survibility during an air combat will be very less.
3. This approach will increase the RSC singnature of F-18 hugely as Centerline Tank is a quite huge object with largest diameter, carried by any combat aircraft( espetially think when today's combat aircraft designers are trying to hide the AAMs and other ammunitions which have lesser diameter and trying to carry in Internal bays even thay are using retarctable Fuel probes to reduce the Radar signature ).

I am surprised why US designers have taken this approach while considering an IRST is quite low weight item with 80-100 Kg range and US is technologically good at Miniaturing avionics items,they could easily intigrated with main fusalage like any other combat planes ? that to when they consider soo much about RCS impact of canopy,fighter seat and other hardware inside the cockpit.
Regards,

A big problem that I see in this method is that they can't really drop the EFT, which seems std. procedure during air combat or if they have to really zip. You'll be dropping million $$s worth equipment along with the tank. Another problem could be FOV. The integrated ones offer better view imho.

The only reason I can think of pursuing this route = space constraints thanks to the aesa.

CM.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Aug 2009 00:17

read this first on AFM Keypub forums..Phazotron apparently is under such debts that it is having trouble even satisfying the already signed contract for the upgrades of 63 IAF MiG-29s..

no way I'd trust this kind of company to come up with the next MRCA AESA radar..this is the sad state of affairs in Russia and there is no way on earth that the IAF should have to bear the brunt of such problems.

apologise for the rather poor translation

link

Debts “synchro-cyclotron -[NIIR]” can tear away tender for the modernization MiG-29 for India
The billionth contract for the modernization MiG-29 for India under the threat of disruption, write today “Vedomosti”.

To developer and to the producer of radar for the fighter - “synchro-cyclotron -[NIIR]” the money are not sufficient: it cannot pay off on the credit and it owed to colleagues, refines publication.

Seventh August in the arbitrage of Moscow was registered the action Of [sberbanka] to the corporation “synchro-cyclotron -[NIIR]” about the penalty c it $21,06 by million because of the been overdue payments on the credit. The director general of Vyacheslav [Tishchenko]'s “synchro-cyclotron” confirmed the fact of the supply of this action. Credit, according to him, was given out two years ago, it was [prolongirovan], but the second time Of [sberbank] did not agree to prolong agreement.

Credit was given out under the guarantee of the export gain “of synchro-cyclotron” on the contract for the modernization of 63 Indian fighters MiG-29. This contract (“synchro-cyclotron” produces the radar “beetle -[ME]”, which expands the combat capabilities of aircraft) with a volume are more than $1 billion, prisoner by moment in 2008 ; it was considered as the great success of Russia on the Indian market, competition on which grows, speaks the expert of the center of the analysis of strategies and technologies of Constantine [Makienko].

India, until now, did not conclude similar contract for the sum more than $2 billion on the modernization of 51 French fighter Of mirage 2000, after returning priority to Russian machines.

“To synchro-cyclotron” means are not sufficient for the performance of contract. Basic customer - [RSK] “MiG” did not pay corporation more than $40 million for the radars presented, “synchro-cyclotron itself” owed to workers of approximately 78 mln rubles. according to the data on August 1.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Aug 2009 00:23

nachiket wrote:
Surya wrote:CM - well on the positive side

The faster this decrepit support\logistic system collapses the better. I do not want to sign on to this and 8 months later find a Gorshkov deal all over again. I would have wished it earlier.

Better it die now.

It will also spur our guys to focus more on developing our private military industrial omplex.
But it may stall our Mig-29 upgrade. No matter what aircraft is chosen for the MRCA those 50 odd 29s in service have to be upgraded. They are still our frontline interceptors.

worst comes to worst, the MiG-29s will get the Elta 2032s, as the array can be scaled to any fighter's nose diameter. already IN SHars are operating with Elta 2032s and from interviews with CoNS Sureesh Mehta, its done wonders for the capabilities of the SHar. the only issue will be with the delays that will come along with such a problem. but I guess we just have to get used to such unforseen problems when dealing with Russians.

Kartik · Post by **Kartik** » 20 Aug 2009 00:26

Austin wrote:I dont think thats really a problem as there is no F-16IN that exist and they are getting F-16 Block 60 of UAE AFAIK.

I think if the SMT/M2 meets the criteria of IAF then with Mig-35 it just gets better or else its end of road for Mig-35 , Mig must be aware of this quite well so they must be confident that this bird they are sending will meet or slightly exceed the specs.

the IAF was not the least bit interested in the SMT or the M2..MiG offered both these for the role that the Su-30MKI now performs, as well as to bulk up squadron numbers..this is on record and the IAF did not take the matter up any further.

b_patel · Post by **b_patel** » 20 Aug 2009 02:28

read this first on AFM Keypub forums..Phazotron apparently is under such debts that it is having trouble even satisfying the already signed contract for the upgrades of 63 IAF MiG-29s..

Expect a price hike in the contract for sure. Otherwise India is going to have to look for another radar to plug into the Mig-29. The El-2032 is not bad but its gonna delay the upgrade schedule.

Cain Marko · Post by **Cain Marko** » 20 Aug 2009 03:18

the fact that the MiG-35 is supposed to be in India, in less than a month really means that they're making a big mess of this unless they bring the definitive MiG-35 to the trials..unless MiG is testing at a breakneck speed in secret, I'm afraid we're going to see the same story- MiG-29M2 dressed up as MiG-35, with the final MiG-35 variant only seen on models or drawings, with quite a bit of work yet to be done, and to be funded by its launch customer.

May be they'll bring back the 1.44 for the MRCA wot (i've always secretly hoped so)! here its been spotted @ MAKS 09, may be thats the secret prototype? I sure as heck will be pleased

http://sitelife.aviationweek.com/ver1.0 ... .Large.jpg

CM.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Aug 2009 03:23

That is revenge.

BTW, that is a 144 and not a 1.44. Better I guess.

John Snow · Post by **John Snow** » 20 Aug 2009 03:49

Its time IAF chief emulates IN Chief.

We need to get away from Mig-21, Its like clinging to Lambretta 150 trying to put 4 St engine, mikuni carb and testing for low emmisions

SaiK · Post by **SaiK** » 20 Aug 2009 04:23

I'd like to advance the mig failure by saying, they did not allign with Saturn engines before even they considered just upping the ovt into 35 name. Mig 35 should have taken El2052 route along with a special saturn engine that would perhaps gets a better qualifications for it being a new version.

and, they have to come a long way anyways on various other avionics packages, that we had earlier opted with MKIs. the upgrade path is slow with migs, and always a problem with spares says the report.

we can start a thread demise of migs right away.. why wait for the trials.

/sorry/ducking.

GeorgeWelch · Post by **GeorgeWelch** » 20 Aug 2009 04:53

Kartik wrote:worst comes to worst, the MiG-29s will get the Elta 2032s

It was tough to tell from the machine translation, but it sounded like part of the problem was that MiG was failing to pay, which could indicate deeper problems.

NRao · Post by **NRao** » 20 Aug 2009 05:05

I am not sure at whom the Putin snip was directed at, but it would not take too much intelligence to note that MiG is not doing very well. And, now that the idea that RuAF will buy both the 35s has been laid to rest, I am inclined to believe that MiG as a brand is close to being shut out.

In fact, let me go out on a limb here. I really do not know what would have happened to Sukhoi too if it were not for the MKI deal. A LOT more than the funds provided by India, IMHO, it was the timing of when the funds were provided. IF that much funds were not infused into Sukhoi, I could be totally wrong, but that company could not have stood up.

Even today, the poor guys have a meager 48 Su-35s to put food on their table.

Like I said, the PAK-FA better be good.

India I suspect still can lean on the MCA, RU, I am not sure.

Singha · Post by **Singha** » 20 Aug 2009 06:24

rip Mikoyan....a hallowed name it shall remain in the annals of aviation though....foxhound lives on!

dont forget sukhoi got both the indian order, 10 planes for indonesia plus 200 flankers to china before the indian order. they were shipping su27 to prc long before we signed the mki deal.

Nrao sir is quite right. anything Mig - it will be totally our headache to fund the entire supply and development work chain while they wont be accountable to us. it will be a decade long
gorshkov2.0 project.

enqyoob · Post by **enqyoob** » 20 Aug 2009 07:56

So why is the MiG35 and not the Su-35 the choice for the MRCA race? Is the Su-35 so much more expensive? Seems like per unit cost is very much lower than that for the SuperHornet?