The PAK-FA Saga Episode IV

[star49]

But its range includes inflight refuelling and Russia does not have an infinite supply of tankers... in fact they have a rather limited supply.

They brought IL-476 production to Russia to produce all variants of IL-76. why do u think they did it? Atleast $1.5b needed to start IL-76 production in Russia.

If range was that important then get rid of the Su-34 and use Backfires... with inflight refuelling capability restored one Backfire can carry more than three times the weapon load of a single Su-34 on an unrefuelled radius of 2,000km. That means if you add inflight refuelling its range explodes because at max payload its range is mostly reduced because fuel is offloaded to allow the extra weapons weight. As soon as it is airborne it can add more fuel and improve its range considerably.

Backfire is uneconomical in engine life, fuel efficiency for the kind of role that is for Su-34. Even the plant of Backfire does not have train workers to modernize it in qood quantity what Sukhoi can do. u have to admit that fact that due to exports in 90s Sukhoi now enjoys huge lead in Production technolgoy and worker training. For the exact same reason even civillian MS-21, Sukhoi SSJ and Yak-130 are produced in Sukhoi plants.

The original Mig-29 was a short range fighter. The current models are more like medium range fighters. The difference in range isn't that large from the Su-27. Most of the Su-27s flights are with half their fuel tanks empty.

Those are old stories.

The reality is that the Su-34s are taking over from the Su-24s and as such their air to air training will hardly be extensive. It might have impressive capabilities in air to air but it will only use these capabilities in self defence.

Su-34 is taking over from both Su-24/Su-25 and Tu-22 to large extent.

What makes the Su-25 and the A-10 for that matter good for close support is because they are not fast.

If an Su-25 can't carry a heavy enough weapon for CAS then you really need to ask is it really CAS or is it strike...

Su-34 can fly at tree height with speed and can surprize unsophisticated enemy with its much powerful sensors. Even they are buying expensive french stuff to equip it. This just shows its importance.

Yeah but lets not over estimate the savings. I mean why would the Russian Army need a light helo to replace the Mi-2 when they could use the Mi-8 instead... it is already inservice. Well some of the roles a light helo performs are hard to perform in a bigger helo. For example the Russian Army just ordered 10 Mi-34s because the other light helos in service can't be looped and rolled and manouvered like the new Mi-28N can, so they wanted a trainer helo that would allow the students to practise such things before they got into the Havoc. They are also introducing the ANSAT helo into service to replace the Mi-2 which of course was made in a NATO country now. The point is that for many roles a lighter helo makes more sense than using a heavy large helo for the job.

Helicopter is not good example for fighters. u can just replace UAV/UCAV for light to medium fighters.

You talk about the cost of Su-35s... well the cost of upgrading Mig-29s to Mig-29SMTs is about 6 million per aircraft... that is less than some tanks and also cheaper than many attack helos and even some LIFTs yet offers rather better performance in every respect.

And that $6m will not give u the ability of $40m Su-35. u cannot put IRBIS into Fulcrum nor the 400KM range BVR weopon.

They have hundreds of stored Su-27s and Mig-29s, I doubt they will be buying very many new aircraft at all except the PAK-FA.

The Mig-35 can carry 6.5 tons of weapons... which is probably 4.5 tons more than it will normally carry for most of its life.

6.5tons is difficult to put on 10 weopons station. Su-35 has 14 and can carry much stronger weopon load on each weopon stations. much more flexibility for heavy pounding.

The JSF is an international project to create a single engine 5th gen fighter to replace a lot of different fighter and light strike and VSTOL fighters. It was never designed to be the cheaper compliment to the F-22, but was supposed to be cheap because of the numbers to be produced. The MIG design however has been designed from the outset to offer 5th gen fighter performance at reduced prices. Everything the F-16 should have been but ended up not being because they had to put all the bells and whistles on it.

JSF cannot supercrusie at speeds and heights of F-22 nor will the radar size will be the same. No point in pouring money in second best because there is no trophy for second best.

How much money do you think the RuAF will be getting?
Odds are they can either buy 400 PAK-FAs or they can have an airforce that is properly funded. I would expect from 2018 they might get 4-5 a year initially and by 2025 they might get 20-30 per year to replace the older legacy fighters still in service.

I expect alot of money as big Russia companies buy natural resorces and companies around the world. I expect the Ruaf reach will increase proportionally to protect those interests not to mention Fleet and bomber escort with long leg fighters.

In european Russia I would expect the Mig-29 to be the most widely deployed fighter, but with the SMT upgrade they can perform medium level strike missions with TV, laser, and IR guided and of course satellite guided bombs and missiles.

The main reason the Mig-29SMT and Su-27SM upgrades are not being introduced more urgently is because the precision guided munitions they use are still not in widespread service in the RuAF.

... a lot of money needs to be spent yet, but unless the threat levels change dramatically (ie McCain for two terms and then something worse perhaps) I can't see the urgency in getting rid of perfectly good aircraft like the Mig-29 and Mig-31 and Su-27s.

Su-27/MIG-31 will be upgraded with time but i am not sure about MIG-29 for Ruaf on same scale.

[GarryB]

I dont think so. there is no large scale budget and procurement programe for MIG-29.

They already have hundreds of Mig-29s in service and in storage. I doubt the Russian AF will get any new aircraft for the forseeable future except the Su-34, the Yak-130, and the PAK-FA. They currently have plenty of Su-27s, Mig-31s, and Mig-29s. Getting them out of storage and upgrading them will allow the AF to not blow its budget on new aircraft. Remember it needs to upgrade its aircraft but those upgraded aircraft will be useless without all the new weapons the new upgrades and new aircraft are able to use. A PAK-FA with an R-27R missile would be a joke.

and agianst Stealth targets u need aircraft with very powerful sensors with lot of fuel economy and speed.

Against warmed over F-16s in eastern Europe and a few Rafales and Typhoons the Mig-29 is good enough to hold its own... if you buy the modern weapons and give it a modest upgrade.

They brought IL-476 production to Russia to produce all variants of IL-76. why do u think they did it? Atleast $1.5b needed to start IL-76 production in Russia.

Now that they have money they need to upgrade their transport and logistics to cope with the increased traffic.

Backfire is uneconomical in engine life, fuel efficiency for the kind of role that is for Su-34.

So there are other factors other that range?

If the only company that gets work in Russia is Sukhoi then only Sukhoi will be able to do the work. Do you not understand that is a very good reason to spread the money around and give MIG some work too?

We keep hearing about just having one type of fighter being a money saver... yet with all the wonderful multirole types in the west how often has it been that one aircraft has actually been used to replace multiple different types previously used in different roles...

I mean if you just look at US carriers... the F-18 first got onboard as a replacement for a strike aircraft called and A-6. Now currently it is also taking on the job of interceptor and the role of the F-14... but soon its strike role will be taken by the JSF and presumably eventually the JSF will take over from the Super Hornet in the interceptor role too... that is the only example I can think of. The F-15C fighter was supported by the F-16... the latter was multirole but generally used as a bomb truck most of the time when the F-15C was available. Then the multirole F-15E replaced the F-111, but it seems that it rarely uses its air to air capability... they are used for strike missions... not CAP.

The PAK-FA and Su-27BM will mostly be used like the F-22 and F-15C. What Russia actually needs is a lighter, cheaper aircraft able to deliver guided air to ground weapons against ground targets. The Mig-29SMT in my opinion would be rather better at that than more Su-30s or modified Su-27s.

Su-34 is taking over from both Su-24/Su-25 and Tu-22 to large extent.

Well I feel sorry for the Russian Army. Su-34s will not be very good at supporting ground forces directly the way helos and Su-25s can. Perhaps they need to relearn an old lesson.

BTW they are upgrading the Tu-22M3, Tu-160 and Tu-95 to allow the use of conventional guided air to ground weapons. I doubt that will harm the use of the Tu-22M3...

Su-34 can fly at tree height with speed and can surprize unsophisticated enemy with its much powerful sensors. Even they are buying expensive french stuff to equip it. This just shows its importance.

Like many other long range strike aircraft can... but long range strike and CAS are two very different missions that have very different requirements.

The only person who thinks an Su-34 can replace a fighter and a CAS aircraft and a Theatre bomber... is an accountant.

Helicopter is not good example for fighters. u can just replace UAV/UCAV for light to medium fighters.

No you can't. UAVs only work when there is no air defence and no enemy air force. Even the most sophisticated UAV can be shot down easily because they don't have RHAWs and self defence suites etc etc. They will fly straight and level no matter how many shells or missiles are heading towards them. And dont say UAVs can be fitted with RHAWs and ESM and ECM Suites... they certainly can but now they cost as much as manned aircraft.... and probably more than an SMT upgrade of a Fulcrum.

And that $6m will not give u the ability of $40m Su-35. u cannot put IRBIS into Fulcrum nor the 400KM range BVR weopon.

And how many Russian AF aircraft are in service now that can currently carry and use a 400km BVR missile? When was the last time the Russian AF fired a missile at a real target that was more than 20km from the launch aircraft?

For most operations they will need to positively ID the target before they are allowed to open fire. Having Mig-29SMTs near the border to make the first intercepts makes perfect sense.

6.5tons is difficult to put on 10 weopons station. Su-35 has 14 and can carry much stronger weopon load on each weopon stations. much more flexibility for heavy pounding.

Very few real targets need 1.5 ton bombs. Those that do can be dealt with via larger aircraft, but why would you base your tactical "numbers" fighter bomber on such extremes? For most air to air missions then 4 R-77x and 2 R-74 and a couple of fuel tanks would do the job. For light strike replace two of those R-77x with 2 x 500kg guided bombs and the job will likely get done effectively enough. Remember a flight of 4 aircraft in the air to air role would give you 16 R-77s and 8 R-74s, while in the air to ground role you'd have 8 x 500kgs of bombs, 8 x R-77x and 8 R-74.

JSF cannot supercrusie at speeds and heights of F-22 nor will the radar size will be the same. No point in pouring money in second best because there is no trophy for second best.

Investing money in a product to sell on the open market to those customers that have money but buying western aircraft is not an option makes perfect sense. If you can use it yourself too as a low cost numbers plane all the better. A light strike fighter doesn't need the stealth to penetrate heavy enemy air defences around cities. It would also be adequate enough to face off against European fighters and Chinese fighters for the forseeable future too.

If it also keeps some competition in the Russian aviation market then it is also worth it.

I expect the Ruaf reach will increase proportionally to protect those interests not to mention Fleet and bomber escort with long leg fighters.

Wasting lots of money on a few hundred PAK-FA and their weapons when they could use their money more effectively on upgrades of existing types so PAK-FA numbers don't need to be too high to protect all of Russia is a game I think the RUAF wont play.

Upgraded Mig-29s and upgraded Su-27s can be given away to allies as gifts as they get older. I can't see them being able to justify giving away PAK-FAs no matter what their condition.

Su-27/MIG-31 will be upgraded with time but i am not sure about MIG-29 for Ruaf on same scale.

Considering the numbers of types they have managed to maintain in service I still can't see the logic of getting rid of an aircraft they have lots of in storage.
Withdrawing the Mig-29 from RuAF service will likely kill any chance of the Mig-35 getting into Indian service. A few million dollars per aircraft to get them to SMT level would make them 10 times more useful than the base model Mig-29s they have had in service all this time. They have certainly done what was expected of them up until now... they haven't withdrawn them from service as quickly as they could.

I personally think this is down to politics and making political choices... well it is obviously bad for the end user.

[star49]

They already have hundreds of Mig-29s in service and in storage. I doubt the Russian AF will get any new aircraft for the forseeable future except the Su-34, the Yak-130, and the PAK-FA. They currently have plenty of Su-27s, Mig-31s, and Mig-29s. Getting them out of storage and upgrading them will allow the AF to not blow its budget on new aircraft. Remember it needs to upgrade its aircraft but those upgraded aircraft will be useless without all the new weapons the new upgrades and new aircraft are able to use. A PAK-FA with an R-27R missile would be a joke.

The problem is they are concentrating on MIG-31 upgrade at Sokol plant and even that is too slow. How long do u think it will take to upgrade 200 MIG-29? when MIG-31 upgrade will take alteast 10 years.

Against warmed over F-16s in eastern Europe and a few Rafales and Typhoons the Mig-29 is good enough to hold its own... if you buy the modern weapons and give it a modest upgrade.

The problem is that East EU country will give bases to JSF operations in Future thats why Ruaf commander has to say MIG-31 can fight 5th generation not MIG-29.

Now that they have money they need to upgrade their transport and logistics to cope with the increased traffic.

Those IL-76 can still be built in Tashkent and they bought the factory also.

So there are other factors other that range?

offcourse Range is not the factor.

If the only company that gets work in Russia is Sukhoi then only Sukhoi will be able to do the work. Do you not understand that is a very good reason to spread the money around and give MIG some work too?

Sukhoi has 15 year advantage over any other firm in Russia. u cannot ignore this fact. Flanker engine sales in thousands. Even J-10 uses same engine.

We keep hearing about just having one type of fighter being a money saver... yet with all the wonderful multirole types in the west how often has it been that one aircraft has actually been used to replace multiple different types previously used in different roles...
I mean if you just look at US carriers... the F-18 first got onboard as a replacement for a strike aircraft called and A-6. Now currently it is also taking on the job of interceptor and the role of the F-14... but soon its strike role will be taken by the JSF and presumably eventually the JSF will take over from the Super Hornet in the interceptor role too... that is the only example I can think of. The F-15C fighter was supported by the F-16... the latter was multirole but generally used as a bomb truck most of the time when the F-15C was available. Then the multirole F-15E replaced the F-111, but it seems that it rarely uses its air to air capability... they are used for strike missions... not CAP.

u have too look into future not past examples. Now avionics are so developed that multifunctional is possible. (they called Su-34 Multifunctional Avionics complex).

The PAK-FA and Su-27BM will mostly be used like the F-22 and F-15C. What Russia actually needs is a lighter, cheaper aircraft able to deliver guided air to ground weapons against ground targets. The Mig-29SMT in my opinion would be rather better at that than more Su-30s or modified Su-27s.

Problem is production capacity. MIG plants simply cannot deliver at quantity and quality at required time frame. and when Sukhoi is already invested so why not improve it further to top level instead of spreading money over Medium tech projects. it is Chinese way of doing things.

Well I feel sorry for the Russian Army. Su-34s will not be very good at supporting ground forces directly the way helos and Su-25s can. Perhaps they need to relearn an old lesson.

Su-34 will surely better than Su-25/MIG-29/Su-24/Tu-22 in its role. Just the sensor power, armour protection both low and high altitude flight profile, side by side cockpit and RCS reduction upto crusie missile level. They have spent past 15 years in perfecting it.

BTW they are upgrading the Tu-22M3, Tu-160 and Tu-95 to allow the use of conventional guided air to ground weapons. I doubt that will harm the use of the Tu-22M3...

No one is saying they should not upgrade it for there intended role.

Like many other long range strike aircraft can... but long range strike and CAS are two very different missions that have very different requirements.

The only person who thinks an Su-34 can replace a fighter and a CAS aircraft and a Theatre bomber... is an accountant.

Nope. Su-34 is different than regular Flanker. read Mikhail Simonov interview.

No you can't. UAVs only work when there is no air defence and no enemy air force. Even the most sophisticated UAV can be shot down easily because they don't have RHAWs and self defence suites etc etc. They will fly straight and level no matter how many shells or missiles are heading towards them. And dont say UAVs can be fitted with RHAWs and ESM and ECM Suites... they certainly can but now they cost as much as manned aircraft.... and probably more than an SMT upgrade of a Fulcrum.

The chance of UAV and MIG-29SMT against sophisticated airdefence is the same. Modern UAV has very low radar signature and fly very high for long loiter time.

And how many Russian AF aircraft are in service now that can currently carry and use a 400km BVR missile? When was the last time the Russian AF fired a missile at a real target that was more than 20km from the launch aircraft?

they are working towards long range BVR capablity through MIG-31 and later on Flanker series. No point in introducing short range capability.

For most operations they will need to positively ID the target before they are allowed to open fire. Having Mig-29SMTs near the border to make the first intercepts makes perfect sense.

and than u have to separate supply chain for keeping MIG-29s in airforce. They have to reduce the types of aircraft to achieve better efficiency from other aircrafts. Russia has shortage of industrial workers in key fields. It just cannot afford workers to spread around so many different aviation plants and projects and it has already affected the export projects and is affecting MTA project too. ur not looking at big picture.

Very few real targets need 1.5 ton bombs. Those that do can be dealt with via larger aircraft, but why would you base your tactical "numbers" fighter bomber on such extremes? For most air to air missions then 4 R-77x and 2 R-74 and a couple of fuel tanks would do the job. For light strike replace two of those R-77x with 2 x 500kg guided bombs and the job will likely get done effectively enough. Remember a flight of 4 aircraft in the air to air role would give you 16 R-77s and 8 R-74s, while in the air to ground role you'd have 8 x 500kgs of bombs, 8 x R-77x and 8 R-74.

the problem is not one off target or War which is cheaper compared to Industrial production, personal, money to spread around so many fighter types and we go into future the cost of avionics is going up exponentially. so u want only to give it to the best.

Investing money in a product to sell on the open market to those customers that have money but buying western aircraft is not an option makes perfect sense. If you can use it yourself too as a low cost numbers plane all the better. A light strike fighter doesn't need the stealth to penetrate heavy enemy air defences around cities. It would also be adequate enough to face off against European fighters and Chinese fighters for the forseeable future too.

If it also keeps some competition in the Russian aviation market then it is also worth it.



Wasting lots of money on a few hundred PAK-FA and their weapons when they could use their money more effectively on upgrades of existing types so PAK-FA numbers don't need to be too high to protect all of Russia is a game I think the RUAF wont play.

They are already playing only high end game. when u look at there Industrial policy. No more cheap stuff. u cannot bifurcate airforce into two tiers.

Upgraded Mig-29s and upgraded Su-27s can be given away to allies as gifts as they get older. I can't see them being able to justify giving away PAK-FAs no matter what their condition.

provided those allies are interested in Soviet era built aircraft.

Considering the numbers of types they have managed to maintain in service I still can't see the logic of getting rid of an aircraft they have lots of in storage.
Withdrawing the Mig-29 from RuAF service will likely kill any chance of the Mig-35 getting into Indian service. A few million dollars per aircraft to get them to SMT level would make them 10 times more useful than the base model Mig-29s they have had in service all this time. They have certainly done what was expected of them up until now... they haven't withdrawn them from service as quickly as they could.

I personally think this is down to politics and making political choices... well it is obviously bad for the end user.

storage aircraft does not mean that u to bring back all of them into service and do costly traing at todays sky high fuel and material prices. Only the best will survive for its intended role.

[GarryB]

The problem is they are concentrating on MIG-31 upgrade at Sokol plant and even that is too slow. How long do u think it will take to upgrade 200 MIG-29? when MIG-31 upgrade will take alteast 10 years.

It has taken so long because not enough money has been allocated to the program. Do you think that now they will suddenly find hundreds of millions of dollars to only buy all new aircraft when with a simple and relatively cheap upgrade their existing aircraft in storage could do almost as good a job?

The Mig-31 upgrade has taken this long because the original Mig-31s can still do the job they were designed for... not much has changed. With upgrades it will be able to do a better job of the job it does now. With the Mig-29 however it is different in that currently the Mig-29s are point defence fighters. With an SMT upgrade they will be able to better intercept targets, but also engage a much wider range of ground targets.

There has been no need to give either a huge upgrade because to benefit from the upgrade they need to be able to use the new weapons that extend their capability... ie R-37Ms are still being developed, and R-77s and other guided weapons the Mig-29SMT can carry are not widely in service with the Russian AF.

The problem is that East EU country will give bases to JSF operations in Future thats why Ruaf commander has to say MIG-31 can fight 5th generation not MIG-29.

Very few EU countries can afford to buy JSFs and even if they could the vast majority of East European fighters and other aircraft types will not be stealthy at all. If you deploy PAK-FAs and Su-27BMs all over European Russia you are more likely to find JSFs and even F-22s deployed in Europe... that is another reason to not escalate the situation by getting rid of the Mig-29s.

Those IL-76 can still be built in Tashkent and they bought the factory also.

The Il-76 is a very useful aircraft.

offcourse Range is not the factor.

Range is a factor... it is just not the main factor.

Sukhoi has 15 year advantage over any other firm in Russia. u cannot ignore this fact. Flanker engine sales in thousands. Even J-10 uses same engine.

Flanker Engine sales mean little to Sukhoi... it is Saturn that makes the Al-31 series, not Sukhoi. Equally the MIG company includes more than the MiG design bureau and they have been making and selling aircraft too, and upgrading their equipment too. If they hadn't moved on in 15 years there is no way the Mig-35 would have an AESA.

u have too look into future not past examples. Now avionics are so developed that multifunctional is possible.

The past has shown that a Flanker is vulnerable when flying slow and low in roles it wasn't designed for. The past has shown that when one plane can do various roles it is often the Army that miss out because all their CAS aircraft are patrolling airspace on air superiority roles instead of hitting ground targets to pave the way for Army ground advances.

Problem is production capacity.

No it isn't.

MIG plants simply cannot deliver at quantity and quality at required time frame.

Who told you that? The Mig-31 upgrade program would be quicker if it was funded to be quicker. Give someone half the money and they will do half the job. MIG sells brand new planes like the Mig-29M2 or Mig-35 and they sell upgrades of existing aircraft like the Mig-29SMT. The Fact that Algeria agreed to buy upgrades and was shocked that the upgrades were applied to existing aircraft rather than new builds says more about Algeria than about MIG.

and when Sukhoi is already invested so why not improve it further to top level instead of spreading money over Medium tech projects.

They couldn't afford to have all Sukhois and have enough aircraft. Besides that means they have no use for hundreds of Mig-29s in storage... what a waste of perfectly good aircraft.

Just the sensor power, armour protection both low and high altitude flight profile, side by side cockpit and RCS reduction upto crusie missile level. They have spent past 15 years in perfecting it.

Sorry, but I can't see it doing anything other than long range strike. That is what it was designed for, and what it will be good at. I doubt it will be any good at all at CAS... for the same reason the F16 was no good at replacing the A-10... they even called it the A-16... but guess what? The fact is that a high supersonic fighter bomber is an airforce ship and is no use near the front line working with army units.

The chance of UAV and MIG-29SMT against sophisticated airdefence is the same. Modern UAV has very low radar signature and fly very high for long loiter time.

Really? Tell that to the pilot of the Mig-29 that recently flew right up to a Georgian UAV and shot it down as easy as anything.

The UAV had no chaff, no flares, no active jammer, no ESM or ECM suite like the Mig-29SMT does.

they are working towards long range BVR capablity through MIG-31 and later on Flanker series. No point in introducing short range capability.

Some targets can be engaged with long range missiles, but if JSF gets deployed to eastern europe one of the features of Stealth is to reduce the detection range of enemy radars. Your 400km range missile might not get a lock at all at any range. Not even target is an expensive stealthy one.

and than u have to separate supply chain for keeping MIG-29s in airforce.

A chain of support needs to exist in those areas for fighter aircraft... if it is already in place then it really doesn't matter if it is the same or different from the planes used in other airbases.

They have to reduce the types of aircraft to achieve better efficiency from other aircrafts.

Yet they keep two different types of strategic bomber, one long range theatre bomber, currently have 3 different types of fighters and are currently introducing another (assuming you don't count Su-30s, and Su-33s as different types too). Not to mention all the different types of other aircraft they have in service.

Russia has shortage of industrial workers in key fields. It just cannot afford workers to spread around so many different aviation plants and projects and it has already affected the export projects and is affecting MTA project too. ur not looking at big picture.

Throwing away in service aircraft simply because there are no workers in the industry is a joke. The Mig-29s in service and in storage are already made. They need an upgrade, they don't need to be built from scratch...
If production really is such a problem then using what they already have instead of starting afresh with what are basically all new aircraft like the Su-27BM and PAK-FA is a much dumber move than it looked before.

They are already playing only high end game. when u look at there Industrial policy. No more cheap stuff. u cannot bifurcate airforce into two tiers.

Not even the USAF can afford all F-22s. They need a cheaper mass produced aircraft to make up stealth numbers and until they get them the F-15 will be in service much longer than you might think.

provided those allies are interested in Soviet era built aircraft.

They will have stealth aircraft or Soviet Era built aircraft as a choice. I very much doubt they could afford an all stealth aircraft airforce... right now no one else can.

storage aircraft does not mean that u to bring back all of them into service

Putting them into storage doesn't mean digging a hole and throwing them down it and covering it with dirt. Every month each aircraft will be taken out and the engines run up and tested... the Russian AF invested a lot of money on those planes... it will be wanting some sort of return on them.

Only the best will survive for its intended role.

Then I guess the Russian Army will be dropping the Su-25SM upgrade and going back to the much better Su-25TM option?

...no... ...didn't think so.

Good enough is the worst enemy of the best. Mig-29SMTs are good enough to do the job, even if an all PAK-FA/Su-35 fleet might look better on paper... for the next 10 years even if all the in service Su-27s get either an SM or BM upgrade the Mig-29s currently in service will be needing upgrades too because there is no way they are going to have any PAK-FAs into service within that time to replace them... are you going to just withdraw the Mig-29s which would leave a gap of 400 aircraft short of what you have right now... pretty hard on the remaining sukhois... or you could drag 400 Sukhoi Su-27s out of storage and upgrade them too... of course the real problem is that MIG is not going to disappear, but without any business except a few Mig-31 upgrades it is not going to grow, so you have one fighter maker will all the fighter making jobs and another fighter maker with no fighter making jobs and no money.

Sounds to me like a very stupid situation that is rather unnecessary.


For a very small outlay existing Mig-29s can be upgraded, the same way the Flankers are going to be upgraded, it will create a bit of competition in the Russian market, create jobs, and support technology. Remember it is not just MIG we are talking about, but engine makers Klimov, and radar makers that traditionally make radars for MIGs etc that you are supporting.

[star49]

It has taken so long because not enough money has been allocated to the program. Do you think that now they will suddenly find hundreds of millions of dollars to only buy all new aircraft when with a simple and relatively cheap upgrade their existing aircraft in storage could do almost as good a job?

I think they have found the money. Just look at OAK Civilian budget and that new testing complex near moscow.

The Mig-31 upgrade has taken this long because the original Mig-31s can still do the job they were designed for... not much has changed. With upgrades it will be able to do a better job of the job it does now. With the Mig-29 however it is different in that currently the Mig-29s are point defence fighters. With an SMT upgrade they will be able to better intercept targets, but also engage a much wider range of ground targets.

MIG-31 upgrade took so long because money in required amount was not available untill recently and there was new BVR missile.

There has been no need to give either a huge upgrade because to benefit from the upgrade they need to be able to use the new weapons that extend their capability... ie R-37Ms are still being developed, and R-77s and other guided weapons the Mig-29SMT can carry are not widely in service with the Russian AF.

Ruaf commander has said that more than 200KM range BVR is already operational with first two MIG-31BM. and MIG-29SMT is not cheap upgrade. Atleast $15 to $20m each. First u have to put Series 3 RD-33 engines for SMT so life can be extended for 10 to 15 year with decreasing operating costs. But still interms of engines it will be behind AL-31FM-1 equiped Su-27SM/Su-34. 117S is in different league. and there is production issue. Salyut and Saturn both are well funded for speedy and continous supply of engines and spares. and Only those firms are participating in fifth generation engine development. Its better to give more contracts to them

Very few EU countries can afford to buy JSFs and even if they could the vast majority of East European fighters and other aircraft types will not be stealthy at all. If you deploy PAK-FAs and Su-27BMs all over European Russia you are more likely to find JSFs and even F-22s deployed in Europe... that is another reason to not escalate the situation by getting rid of the Mig-29s.

JSF can be transferred from richer EU countries to poor countries for forward deployment in time of war. So u have to take into account combine threat.

The Il-76 is a very useful aircraft.

Thats not the reason of transferring IL-76 production. They want to produce 4th generation IL-476 with better fuel consumption, longer life, greater production rates and parts supplier closer to manufacturing base. To achieve all that u need billions in investment along with skilled workers with high pay scales on modern production techniques along with workers to maintain and support that advance machinery inside the Plant. u cannot do that in far way thirdworld country. Producing aircraft on Western standards is whole different game. u cannot afford lose workers to other industries like Auto/Fabs etc.

Range is a factor... it is just not the main factor.

U can put Brahmos class weopons with extended range beyond MTCR into Su-34. It is the first aircraft integrated with Glosnass guided weopons. So development is far ahead than any other Strike fighter in the moment.

Flanker Engine sales mean little to Sukhoi... it is Saturn that makes the Al-31 series, not Sukhoi. Equally the MIG company includes more than the MiG design bureau and they have been making and selling aircraft too, and upgrading their equipment too. If they hadn't moved on in 15 years there is no way the Mig-35 would have an AESA.

Sukhoi sold just Su-27SK license for $2.5B in 1996 to Chinese and another $3.3B license to Indians. I am not even going into direct supply, Kits and
spares contracts. $1.5B from Venzuela. $2.5B from Algeria. $1.4B from Malaysia. $2B for Sukhoi SSJ.
ww.knaapo.ru. France/Switzerland/Germany/US equipment are working there to produce new jets and upgrade SU-27SM. AESA is very cheap product. It is back end of Zhuk-ME with T/R modules from www.micran.ru

The past has shown that a Flanker is vulnerable when flying slow and low in roles it wasn't designed for. The past has shown that when one plane can do various roles it is often the Army that miss out because all their CAS aircraft are patrolling airspace on air superiority roles instead of hitting ground targets to pave the way for Army ground advances.

Fulcrum is also not designed for CAS role. Fullback is different.

Who told you that? The Mig-31 upgrade program would be quicker if it was funded to be quicker. Give someone half the money and they will do half the job. MIG sells brand new planes like the Mig-29M2 or Mig-35 and they sell upgrades of existing aircraft like the Mig-29SMT. The Fact that Algeria agreed to buy upgrades and was shocked that the upgrades were applied to existing aircraft rather than new builds says more about Algeria than about MIG.

When u compare Su-30MKA with build quality that has passed rigours testing of various countries with MIG-29SMT. Just to make Irkut Airbus certified $200m was spent.
Just engine smoke is big issue and that is only solved in RD-33MK which u cant put on SMT. there is no point in wasting pilot training and ground support on inferior product.

They couldn't afford to have all Sukhois and have enough aircraft. Besides that means they have no use for hundreds of Mig-29s in storage... what a waste of perfectly good aircraft.

And what about wasting fuel and putting obsolete engines with shorter life to make aircraft airborne.

Sorry, but I can't see it doing anything other than long range strike. That is what it was designed for, and what it will be good at. I doubt it will be any good at all at CAS... for the same reason the F16 was no good at replacing the A-10... they even called it the A-16... but guess what? The fact is that a high supersonic fighter bomber is an airforce ship and is no use near the front line working with army units.

So why do u think Su-34 is 12 tons heavier than Su-35?

Really? Tell that to the pilot of the Mig-29 that recently flew right up to a Georgian UAV and shot it down as easy as anything.

But it does not mean u spend further money.

The UAV had no chaff, no flares, no active jammer, no ESM or ECM suite like the Mig-29SMT does.

When UAV at high altitude is protected by another country airforce. It is different game.

Some targets can be engaged with long range missiles, but if JSF gets deployed to eastern europe one of the features of Stealth is to reduce the detection range of enemy radars. Your 400km range missile might not get a lock at all at any range. Not even target is an expensive stealthy one.

That u have to loodat what kind of radars are developed in next 10 years. 400KM radar is for export. domestic will be far higher in performance.

A chain of support needs to exist in those areas for fighter aircraft... if it is already in place then it really doesn't matter if it is the same or different from the planes used in other airbases.

When they change greater part of armed forces to professional and keep wages rising just so that people dont leave to private sector. There is will be menpower issue.

Yet they keep two different types of strategic bomber, one long range theatre bomber, currently have 3 different types of fighters and are currently introducing another (assuming you don't count Su-30s, and Su-33s as different types too). Not to mention all the different types of other aircraft they have in service.

Ideally they would want to retire Tu-22 and concentrate on blackjack now but since Su-34 production is slow in the beginning. they will keep it for while.

Throwing away in service aircraft simply because there are no workers in the industry is a joke. The Mig-29s in service and in storage are already made. They need an upgrade, they don't need to be built from scratch...
If production really is such a problem then using what they already have instead of starting afresh with what are basically all new aircraft like the Su-27BM and PAK-FA is a much dumber move than it looked before.

I am not going to economic discussion. they have huge problem with menpower. Just because there other opportunties in IT/mining/Autos for skilled workers.
For upgrades u need new engines and for new engines u need to buy materials. and the end engine is inferior to what is produced in other factories and in much greater quantity and much faster upgrades at Sukhoi Plants. Just look at Perm/Salyut that are way more prosperous than Chems RD-33 engines plant and they have great difficulty in fullfilling order due to metal prices.

www.salut.ru
According to the director joint stock company “Perm' motor plant” of Mikhail [Dicheskul], profitabilities of the production of aircraft engine it in 2007 composed only 3-6%. “Thus, at sale of new aircraft engine enterprise to earn money for coating of administrative expenditures and to obtain profit practically does not can”, stated director. Last year cost completion for the serially produced engines PS -90[f] for the transport aircraft Il-76 increased 1,2-1,7. This increase suppliers explain by a price hike of metal on the World Market. However, when world prices fall, suppliers selling prices do not change. “In the prime cost of the production of the aircraft engines of family PS -90[a] suppliers “eat” to 70-75%, but within the framework this price simply it cannot be existed, and state is simply obligated to regulate prices”, conclusions Mikhail [Dicheskul].

In the federal antimonopolistic service (FRONT) with the requirement to conduct checking the observance of the anti-monopoly legislation by metallurgical companies, after taking the measures provided by law, turned themselves oil-industry workers - head “[Surgutneftegaza]” Vladimir Bogdanov, company “To [gazpromneft]” and the development fund of tube industry. They call to increase export duties to the metal. Now to them was joined the association of the autos-producer of Russia, which accused the producers of steel of the [kartelnom] agreement.

To 95% of produced in Russia metal, necessary in the aviation and the missile construction, it goes abroad. Rest is sold inside the country on the world prices. According to the director general [FGUP] Yuri [Eliseev]'s “salute”, “this is simple diversion, it would seem, innocent, hidden after the mechanisms of market, but directed toward that in order to completely " place” production”. It considers that “is necessary the adoption of urgent measures from the side of government for the coordination of price policy with the fulfillment of [goszakaza] and export deliveries”.

The conflict of interests of [oboronshchikov] and metallurgists it would be possible to solve, pinching either those or others. It suffices to inject the mechanism of the real indexing of the expenditures of [oboronshchikov] for raw material.

Not even the USAF can afford all F-22s. They need a cheaper mass produced aircraft to make up stealth numbers and until they get them the F-15 will be in service much longer than you might think.

F-15 cannot be much longer. Its airframe life will end. and JSF is as expensive as F-22.

They will have stealth aircraft or Soviet Era built aircraft as a choice. I very much doubt they could afford an all stealth aircraft airforce... right now no one else can.

Russia is far richer country than any in other in the world.
Wealth of country directly depends on natural resources exploitation in efficient manner. Country with no debt payments or interest payments to any one.

Putting them into storage doesn't mean digging a hole and throwing them down it and covering it with dirt. Every month each aircraft will be taken out and the engines run up and tested... the Russian AF invested a lot of money on those planes... it will be wanting some sort of return on them.

They are soviet era planes built in 80s. Spending money on fuel, material, training, ground support is waste of manpower and resources.

Then I guess the Russian Army will be dropping the Su-25SM upgrade and going back to the much better Su-25TM option?

Su-25/Su-24/Tu-22 has still role to play untill several regiments of Su-34 are properly equiped with full training, new PGMs etc. On other hand u already have Su-27SM and MIG-31 (engine common with IL-76) to take role of MIG-29.

Good enough is the worst enemy of the best. Mig-29SMTs are good enough to do the job, even if an all PAK-FA/Su-35 fleet might look better on paper... for the next 10 years even if all the in service Su-27s get either an SM or BM upgrade the Mig-29s currently in service will be needing upgrades too because there is no way they are going to have any PAK-FAs into service within that time to replace them... are you going to just withdraw the Mig-29s which would leave a gap of 400 aircraft short of what you have right now... pretty hard on the remaining sukhois... or you could drag 400 Sukhoi Su-27s out of storage and upgrade them too... of course the real problem is that MIG is not going to disappear, but without any business except a few Mig-31 upgrades it is not going to grow, so you have one fighter maker will all the fighter making jobs and another fighter maker with no fighter making jobs and no money.

Sounds to me like a very stupid situation that is rather unnecessary.

MIG-29SMT are good enough to do certain jobs but the amount of time,
resources required to make them usefull for next 10 to 15 years are not there.

For a very small outlay existing Mig-29s can be upgraded, the same way the Flankers are going to be upgraded, it will create a bit of competition in the Russian market, create jobs, and support technology. Remember it is not just MIG we are talking about, but engine makers Klimov, and radar makers that traditionally make radars for MIGs etc that you are supporting.

how can u build RD-33 series 3 engines cheaply with sky high metal prices , energy to run the plant and wage growth to keep up with inflation?
OR u want to use those horrible 1980s era 500 hr life span smokey engines for next 10 to 15 years?
There is alot of other issues i am not even discussing.

[GarryB]

I think they have found the money. Just look at OAK Civilian budget and that new testing complex near moscow.

Is the OAK the Russian AF? Brand new aircraft come out of the AFs budget and will cost more than even the most expensive SMT upgrade.

MIG-31 upgrade took so long because money in required amount was not available untill recently and there was new BVR missile.

So why did you use it as an example showing MIG can't deliver upgraded aircraft on time? MIG doesn't design BVR missiles.

and MIG-29SMT is not cheap upgrade. Atleast $15 to $20m each. First u have to put Series 3 RD-33 engines for SMT so life can be extended for 10 to 15 year with decreasing operating costs.

The top SMT upgrade is not necessary, and the engines don't need to all be replaced.

But still interms of engines it will be behind AL-31FM-1 equiped Su-27SM/Su-34. 117S is in different league.

So what? Why do you think the Russian AF needs to afford the extra expense of having all the best when good enough is good enough?

and there is production issue. Salyut and Saturn both are well funded for speedy and continous supply of engines and spares. and Only those firms are participating in fifth generation engine development. Its better to give more contracts to them

Yeah, but the problem there is that there are dozens of manufacturers that make RD-33s like Klimov plant that you don't want to shut down because they also make the old engines for the Mi-8/-14/-17 etc Hips and Mi-24 Hinds, but also the new engines for the Havoc, Hokum, and upgraded Hinds.

Development of the AL series engines is the Lyulka Research and technology centre, while Salyut, Saturn, and Ufa build the engines.

You can't just say you will save money by making one less engine... lots of companies make them and make other engine types as well. Dropping one engine will just make them rely on fewer income sources... making them more fragile rather than stronger.

JSF can be transferred from richer EU countries to poor countries for forward deployment in time of war. So u have to take into account combine threat.

They certainly could but why would they do that? It would have to be a provocation... either a NATO provocation, or the Russian provocation of replacing old Mig-29s with PAK-FAs then they might feel obliged to counter with JSFs.

By putting Mig-29SMTs out to patrol borders with NATO countries Russia will be sending a message. If NATO chooses to deploy JSFs to Russias borders anyway... well then you can realise who they think is the enemy and ramp up PAK-FA production.

u cannot do that in far way thirdworld country. Producing aircraft on Western standards is whole different game. u cannot afford lose workers to other industries like Auto/Fabs etc.

There are half a dozen factories in Russia that build some from of jet or turbine engine. Funding only one of those will lead to the skilled workers in the other factories going to other better paid jobs making cars or whatever.

U can put Brahmos class weopons with extended range beyond MTCR into Su-34. It is the first aircraft integrated with Glosnass guided weopons. So development is far ahead than any other Strike fighter in the moment.

there are a lot of modern guided missiles the Russians need to put into widespread service before they start looking at weapons like BrahMos. Odds are they are unlikely to be hunting and killing ships in the next 20 years, so tactical missiles like the Kh-25 (AS-10/AS-7/AS-12) and Kh-29 (AS-14) and Kh-31 (AS-17) and Kh-59 (AS-13 and AS-18) and Kh-58 (AS-11) series make much more sense.

AESA is very cheap product.

How many planes currently fly the worlds skies with AESA? If it is so cheap and easy... where are the South Korean AESAs, the Chinese AESAs, the Japanese AESAs, the European AESAs, the Russian AESAs in service?

Fulcrum is also not designed for CAS role. Fullback is different.

The original Fulcrum was not. The SMT can do most things the Su-34 can within the parameters of CAS, and is a much cheaper and more widely available asset for the role. There are plenty of targets that will require much more plane than the SMT and for those jobs you use the 34.

You don't use a Rolls Royce to pull a plow in a farmers field.

SMT and Frogfoot are workhorses... tractors.

Just to make Irkut Airbus certified $200m was spent.

So the money has been spent and Irkut is Airbus certified...

Just engine smoke is big issue and that is only solved in RD-33MK which u cant put on SMT.

Why is engine smoke an issue? In a war zone who is going to notice some more smoke?

And what about wasting fuel and putting obsolete engines with shorter life to make aircraft airborne.

In real combat neither aircraft nor engines will last long anyway. In peace time the free things that are already paid for will be cheaper than the brand new things that haven't been paid for yet.

So why do u think Su-34 is 12 tons heavier than Su-35?

Extra avionics and extra fuel and extra crewman. The SU-34 is no more a replacement for the Su-25 than the F-15E is a replacement for the A-10.

But it does not mean u spend further money.

Those little slow Israeli UAVs the Georgians are using work out at $12 million dollars each. They have already lost about 7 with little to show for it.

When UAV at high altitude is protected by another country airforce. It is different game.

So UAVs don't mean you don't need an airforce to protect them... so why bother with UAVs? Why not use what the Russian Army and Airforce would normally use... satellites. The SMT is not a surveillance plane so UAVs are hardly going to replace SMTs.

That u have to loodat what kind of radars are developed in next 10 years. 400KM radar is for export. domestic will be far higher in performance.

But why? What is the point of having an Su-27BM flying over Moscow tracking targets taking off from Heathrow airport?

Besides most modern fighters will spend more time listening with their radars than transmitting anyway... it makes no sense having every fighter with an AWACs size radar in its nose. It would be too expensive for a start. And second when they used that radar and give the enemy precise fixes on their location setting up traps becomes possible. If instead you take the work the PVO did with Su-30s using their radar and delegating targets to other fighters flying with it then you can have a large force with one Su-27BM flying with 4-6 Mig-29SMTs with the latter carrying a full load of R-77Ms or R-77PUs with the Su-27BM using its radar to detect targets and passing target data to the Migs which can accelerate and climb and launch their missiles with an optimum initial speed and height based on data from the Su-27BM. Unless the target turns on its radar it will detect the Su-27BM and a lock but when the R-77s g active they might assume a long range shot from medium height and moderate speed when it was actually only a medium range shot but at high speed and high altitude... the missile having much more energy than the target thinks.

When they change greater part of armed forces to professional and keep wages rising just so that people dont leave to private sector. There is will be menpower issue.

But think of all those men freed up for factory work...

Ideally they would want to retire Tu-22 and concentrate on blackjack now but since Su-34 production is slow in the beginning. they will keep it for while.

With inflight refuelling the Tu-22M3 could carry a full compliment of 3 Kh-22M missiles... the current upgraded models of which have been offered for high altitude research with speeds of mach 4.6 and very high operational altitudes.

I am not going to economic discussion. they have huge problem with menpower. Just because there other opportunties in IT/mining/Autos for skilled workers.

Which means taking skilled workers away from making the PAK-FA just to make some Su-27BMs brand new while there are hundreds of Mig-29s, Mig-31s and Su-27s in storage makes even less sense. An upgrade is less work than a scratch build.

For upgrades u need new engines and for new engines u need to buy materials.

For upgrades the Russian AF can pick and choose what needs to be upgraded and what does not. The Mil Std digital data bus needs to be incorporated, and new LCD screens in the cockpits, but the engines can actually be left. The radar can be tweaked to allow the use of R-77 missiles and a few air to ground weapons and a weapons pod like SAPSAN can be used for other guided air to ground ordinance.

F-15 cannot be much longer. Its airframe life will end. and JSF is as expensive as F-22.

Well the JSF and F-22 are practically in service yet the F-15 and F-16 are not being withdrawn from service... and wont be for decades. It will take time to build up numbers of F-35s and even then there will be units in some backwater that still use F-16s for a decade or more to come.

What you are suggesting is that the Su-27BM is the JSF and the PAK-FA is the F-22 and so Russia can dump all its F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s right now. Any shortfall in the numbers of planes airworthy can be made up by making more Su27BMs.

What I am telling you is that production of Su-27BMs with the high price of metal and shortage of aircraft makers is not going to be that great. Most Su-27BMs will be upgraded Su-27s. The PAK-FA will not flow from the factory floors in their hundreds or thousands.

There will be less than 400 PAK-FAs. The Su-27BMs might number 400 as a final total. In my opinion the Mig-29SMTs might end up numbering 4-500, and the Mig-31BMs might number 2-300 and might get a really powerful AESA radar.

Russia is far richer country than any in other in the world.

Currently there is a lot of cash there, but there is an enormous number of things that need money. They need to completely overhaul their logistics... trucks, planes, etc. They need to upgrade and improve in many many areas and they are going to use that money up very quickly.

The things that make the west suffer with high fuel prices will make Russia suffer for exactly the same reasons. Inflation... transport costs increase the costs of everything. This is just as bad for Russia as it is for the west.

Wealth of country directly depends on natural resources exploitation in efficient manner.

For the last 15 years the Russia that exists today got by with Su-27s, Mig-31s, and Mig-29s defending their borders. Going all gold plated and buying 1,000 PAK_FAs and T-95 tanks and Ka-60 helos etc etc is not being sensible or responsible.

Having 5th gen fighter planes when you still use foreign jet trainers like the L-39... which was a good solid design... in the 70s is a little strange don't you think?

They are soviet era planes built in 80s. Spending money on fuel, material, training, ground support is waste of manpower and resources.

The money has been spent. They are deployed to bases. The ground crews are trained to service them, the pilots trained to fly them. If you want to introduce Flankers and PAK-FAs everywhere then those crews and support teams have to learn the new aircraft anyway. Why not make that new aircraft cheaper Mig-29SMTs that will upset neighbours less and cost less so money can be put into housing and a slight increase in wages and pensions?

On other hand u already have Su-27SM and MIG-31 (engine common with IL-76) to take role of MIG-29.

The Su-27SMs are upgraded existing aircraft. They already have roles and bases. Making them cover twice or four times the area would be too much. Mig-31s already have a role and are performing it. It makes no sense to demobilise a Mig-29 unit and replace it with a Mig-31 unit, or have a nearby Mig-31 unit take its role.

MIG-29SMT are good enough to do certain jobs but the amount of time,
resources required to make them usefull for next 10 to 15 years are not there.

Just an upgrade to SMT level is all the resources they need to make existing Mig-29 units useful for the next decade and a half.

how can u build RD-33 series 3 engines cheaply with sky high metal prices

The Mig-29 does not need the RD-33 series 3 engines. They have hundreds of planes in storage... they could cannibalise engines to keep the existing engines running for 10 years without any new parts. Buying a few new engines would give work to a factory that could do with the income.

u want to use those horrible 1980s era 500 hr life span smokey engines for next 10 to 15 years?

The Germans kept the F-4 Phantom in service right up until they started receiving Typhoons.

[star49]

Is the OAK the Russian AF? Brand new aircraft come out of the AFs budget and will cost more than even the most expensive SMT upgrade.

Russian airforce has to deal with combined entity OAK. It cannot buy a single aircraft without OAK. SMT upgrade does not provide the service life, range, Sensors power that Ruaf needs in acceptable quantity.

So why did you use it as an example showing MIG can't deliver upgraded aircraft on time? MIG doesn't design BVR missiles.

Because MIG has to wait for Government money to finish MIG-31BM project in 10 years but Sukhoi delivered Su-27SM already developed with new engines, FBW, IRST, cockpit upgrades without single money from Ruaf and that was 4 years ago. Similar is Su-24 upgrades. u cannot have a industrial entity soley depended on government.

The top SMT upgrade is not necessary, and the engines don't need to all be replaced.

Engine does not need replacement? so how the aircraft fly especially if they want to increase the flight hours of Pilots closer to Nato standard. u cannot have untrained pilots and aircraft all the time in workshop for overhauls.

So what? Why do you think the Russian AF needs to afford the extra expense of having all the best when good enough is good enough?

For that good enough they have still spend money which can be better spent some where else and that is going to obsolete faster than Flanker upgrades.

Yeah, but the problem there is that there are dozens of manufacturers that make RD-33s like Klimov plant that you don't want to shut down because they also make the old engines for the Mi-8/-14/-17 etc Hips and Mi-24 Hinds, but also the new engines for the Havoc, Hokum, and upgraded Hinds.

Klimov design helicopter and RD-33 engines but it does not make them. Chem plant and MotorSch of Ukraine makes engine for them. and in budget they put money to transfer helicopter engines to Russia. Now where is the scale of investment there for RD engines.

Development of the AL series engines is the Lyulka Research and technology centre, while Salyut, Saturn, and Ufa build the engines.

Salut has independed design bureau having there own upgrades. thats why AL-31FM-1/2/3 are different 117S from Saturn.

You can't just say you will save money by making one less engine... lots of companies make them and make other engine types as well. Dropping one engine will just make them rely on fewer income sources... making them more fragile rather than stronger.

There is stronger engine firms like Saturn/Salyut for fighter engines. Two are good enough. Even in US they have two major suppliers.

They certainly could but why would they do that? It would have to be a provocation... either a NATO provocation, or the Russian provocation of replacing old Mig-29s with PAK-FAs then they might feel obliged to counter with JSFs.

By putting Mig-29SMTs out to patrol borders with NATO countries Russia will be sending a message. If NATO chooses to deploy JSFs to Russias borders anyway... well then you can realise who they think is the enemy and ramp up PAK-FA production.

PAK-FA needs to build in certain quantities to make it affordable for the Plant and it is alrady on Sukhoi webpage. U cannot take resources from that try to maintian 400 obsolete fighters.

There are half a dozen factories in Russia that build some from of jet or turbine engine. Funding only one of those will lead to the skilled workers in the other factories going to other better paid jobs making cars or whatever.

Saturn/Salyut/Perm/Klimov are the major and each have its own speciallity. why u think Klimov not invited to 5th generation engine?

there are a lot of modern guided missiles the Russians need to put into widespread service before they start looking at weapons like BrahMos. Odds are they are unlikely to be hunting and killing ships in the next 20 years, so tactical missiles like the Kh-25 (AS-10/AS-7/AS-12) and Kh-29 (AS-14) and Kh-31 (AS-17) and Kh-59 (AS-13 and AS-18) and Kh-58 (AS-11) series make much more sense.

odds are they they are looking it hypersonic class missiles with much extended ranges along with Glosnoss guided bombs. Most of PGMs what u mentioned will retired.

How many planes currently fly the worlds skies with AESA? If it is so cheap and easy... where are the South Korean AESAs, the Chinese AESAs, the Japanese AESAs, the European AESAs, the Russian AESAs in service?

It has more to do with technical ability and cooling requirements and making small AESA does not make a difference. How do u think Sweden/Israel could afford AESA radars 15 years ago when there economies were tiny.

The original Fulcrum was not. The SMT can do most things the Su-34 can within the parameters of CAS, and is a much cheaper and more widely available asset for the role. There are plenty of targets that will require much more plane than the SMT and for those jobs you use the 34.

You don't use a Rolls Royce to pull a plow in a farmers field.

SMT and Frogfoot are workhorses... tractors.

SMT upgrades need new engines, airframe extension, avionics for ground hitting and new pilot training on cockpit procedures. It aint cheap and it will take time for MIG to ramp up production.

So the money has been spent and Irkut is Airbus certified...

I just mentioning that they had money before thats why they are ahead in production technologies along with worker pay.

Why is engine smoke an issue? In a war zone who is going to notice some more smoke?

In real combat neither aircraft nor engines will last long anyway. In peace time the free things that are already paid for will be cheaper than the brand new things that haven't been paid for yet.

why do u think all new engines with aircraft design put premium on reducing its signature and u need flight hours for proficient training. 1980s era RD-33 engines are not going to allow it. u will lose pilots any way.

Extra avionics and extra fuel and extra crewman. The SU-34 is no more a replacement for the Su-25 than the F-15E is a replacement for the A-10.

Russian claim that Su-34 is far better suited for its role than anyother aircraft for its role and role is properly defined. F-15E is Su-30MK2 not Su-34.

Those little slow Israeli UAVs the Georgians are using work out at $12 million dollars each. They have already lost about 7 with little to show for it.

When those UAVs are supported by Fighters its alot harder to get close enough on them and fire short range missiles. u need long range sensors to find UAVs at greater ranges and use BVR in actual war. Not wasting Gas and aircraft to get close enough to each and every UAV flying around.

So UAVs don't mean you don't need an airforce to protect them... so why bother with UAVs? Why not use what the Russian Army and Airforce would normally use... satellites. The SMT is not a surveillance plane so UAVs are hardly going to replace SMTs.

UAVs are eyes in the sky with much longer loiter time, higher altitude and lower cost than Twin engines fighter or AWACS. and these need to be protected in actual war. u cannot assume that u will go after them with short range missiles or a gun. MIG-31 role is also now hitting UAVs.

But why? What is the point of having an Su-27BM flying over Moscow tracking targets taking off from Heathrow airport?

Because Sukhoi can built Su-27BM now with modern industrial machinery. U just cant wait highly Skilled wokers lying around wasting time and lose there skills for a decade untill PAK-FA enters production. U need constant work for factory for its long term future.

Besides most modern fighters will spend more time listening with their radars than transmitting anyway... it makes no sense having every fighter with an AWACs size radar in its nose. It would be too expensive for a start. And second when they used that radar and give the enemy precise fixes on their location setting up traps becomes possible. If instead you take the work the PVO did with Su-30s using their radar and delegating targets to other fighters flying with it then you can have a large force with one Su-27BM flying with 4-6 Mig-29SMTs with the latter carrying a full load of R-77Ms or R-77PUs with the Su-27BM using its radar to detect targets and passing target data to the Migs which can accelerate and climb and launch their missiles with an optimum initial speed and height based on data from the Su-27BM. Unless the target turns on its radar it will detect the Su-27BM and a lock but when the R-77s g active they might assume a long range shot from medium height and moderate speed when it was actually only a medium range shot but at high speed and high altitude... the missile having much more energy than the target thinks.

And u cannot have AWACS every where and fighter radars give more powerful beam on narrow area to shoot down low rcs targets. both in air and ground. why do u think there is Ultra SAR mode in new radars?
there is reason for powerful sensors for air to air and air to ground role. The era of MIG-21 size fighters is long gone.

With inflight refuelling the Tu-22M3 could carry a full compliment of 3 Kh-22M missiles... the current upgraded models of which have been offered for high altitude research with speeds of mach 4.6 and very high operational altitudes.

Provided u can maintain operation readiness, pilot traing like Su-34 with Tu-22M3. u simply cannot compare the engine built now to what have been built 20 years ago.

Which means taking skilled workers away from making the PAK-FA just to make some Su-27BMs brand new while there are hundreds of Mig-29s, Mig-31s and Su-27s in storage makes even less sense. An upgrade is less work than a scratch build.

Offcoures it makes less sense to build Su-27BM now because if u dont built that u will not be able to built PAK-FA in 10 years in sufficient quantity and ultimately the obsolete fighters will crash down because of old airframes/engines. why do u think it needs so many billions and new worker training just to start production of Civillian airline in Russia because old workers has retired and plants are not modernized and this take alot of investment and time.

For upgrades the Russian AF can pick and choose what needs to be upgraded and what does not. The Mil Std digital data bus needs to be incorporated, and new LCD screens in the cockpits, but the engines can actually be left. The radar can be tweaked to allow the use of R-77 missiles and a few air to ground weapons and a weapons pod like SAPSAN can be used for other guided air to ground ordinance.

Engines can be left out? u want those MIG-29 to become IAF MIG-21 crashing on Pilots with no hope of training.?

Well the JSF and F-22 are practically in service yet the F-15 and F-16 are not being withdrawn from service... and wont be for decades. It will take time to build up numbers of F-35s and even then there will be units in some backwater that still use F-16s for a decade or more to come.

u have to understand this F-15/F-16 have better service life than Soviet built fighters. and were in production throught out the 90s.
IF Ruaf wants training on the same level. MIG-29 will be long retired.

What you are suggesting is that the Su-27BM is the JSF and the PAK-FA is the F-22 and so Russia can dump all its F-15s, F-16s, and F-18s right now. Any shortfall in the numbers of planes airworthy can be made up by making more Su27BMs.

I am not saying Su-27BM is JSF but there is real industrial/commerical reasons behind it.

What I am telling you is that production of Su-27BMs with the high price of metal and shortage of aircraft makers is not going to be that great. Most Su-27BMs will be upgraded Su-27s. The PAK-FA will not flow from the factory floors in their hundreds or thousands.

U dont need thousands. u need couple of hundreds of each. and factory is already upgraded to do the work which is not case with MIG.

There will be less than 400 PAK-FAs. The Su-27BMs might number 400 as a final total. In my opinion the Mig-29SMTs might end up numbering 4-500, and the Mig-31BMs might number 2-300 and might get a really powerful AESA radar.

ur assuming to much into the future. PAK-FA will be in production for 30 to 40 years just like JSF. MIG-29SMT does not have futre except for token numbers for export purposes.

Currently there is a lot of cash there, but there is an enormous number of things that need money. They need to completely overhaul their logistics... trucks, planes, etc. They need to upgrade and improve in many many areas and they are going to use that money up very quickly.

The things that make the west suffer with high fuel prices will make Russia suffer for exactly the same reasons. Inflation... transport costs increase the costs of everything. This is just as bad for Russia as it is for the west.

thats why they need highly efficient engines of 4000hr than 400hrs MIG-29 and spending workers time on overhaulds all the time.

.

Having 5th gen fighter planes when you still use foreign jet trainers like the L-39... which was a good solid design... in the 70s is a little strange don't you think?

they orgainzing YAK-130 production at higher scale.

The money has been spent. They are deployed to bases. The ground crews are trained to service them, the pilots trained to fly them. If you want to introduce Flankers and PAK-FAs everywhere then those crews and support teams have to learn the new aircraft anyway. Why not make that new aircraft cheaper Mig-29SMTs that will upset neighbours less and cost less so money can be put into housing and a slight increase in wages and pensions?

PAK-FA/Flanker crew will travel with them. No need to train MIG-29 crew with them.

The Su-27SMs are upgraded existing aircraft. They already have roles and bases. Making them cover twice or four times the area would be too much. Mig-31s already have a role and are performing it. It makes no sense to demobilise a Mig-29 unit and replace it with a Mig-31 unit, or have a nearby Mig-31 unit take its role.

Su-27SM uses 3000 hrs engine rather than 400 hrs of MIG-29. MIG-31 missile and radar range has been increased so it can take role over greater area.

The Mig-29 does not need the RD-33 series 3 engines. They have hundreds of planes in storage... they could cannibalise engines to keep the existing engines running for 10 years without any new parts. Buying a few new engines would give work to a factory that could do with the income.

It does not work that way. Even if u put engines from cannablized MIG-29. it will be used up in 3 to 4 years. or need constant overhauling. so whats the point.

The Germans kept the F-4 Phantom in service right up until they started receiving Typhoons.

and Russia is going to use Su-27SM/MIG-31 untill PAK-FA comes in sufficient numbers.

[GarryB]

Russian airforce has to deal with combined entity OAK. It cannot buy a single aircraft without OAK. SMT upgrade does not provide the service life, range, Sensors power that Ruaf needs in acceptable quantity.

The Russian AF is in the same boat as the German AF... they have already decided what aircraft they want to move forward with... ie PAK-FA/Typhoon. There is no point in building brand new aircraft for the role of interim fighter if they already have aircraft that can do the job on hand. The have Mig-29s and Su-27s in large enough numbers to operate both for the two decades it will take to get PAK-FA into production and in service in sufficient numbers to cut existing types.

u cannot have a industrial entity soley depended on government.

What other company anywhere around the world provides products or product upgrades to the government for free in peacetime? A companies job is to make money. This new company will be no different.

Engine does not need replacement? so how the aircraft fly especially if they want to increase the flight hours of Pilots closer to Nato standard.

By using up the engines they do have they can delay the time they need to buy new engines. Having an extra 400 Mig-29SMTs in service will guarantee extra aircraft are available for extra flight time at less cost than making an extra 400 Su-35s from scratch.

u cannot have untrained pilots and aircraft all the time in workshop for overhauls.

Every type of aircraft needs maintainence and overhauls. Part of the SMT upgrade reduces maintainence costs by introducing onboard diagnostic equipment and replacing some parts with more durable materials.

For that good enough they have still spend money which can be better spent some where else and that is going to obsolete faster than Flanker upgrades.

That is very short sighted. Ignoring what you already have and spending money on something new when what you already have can do the job is stupid. If you have a Pentium III computer and all you do is play Solitaire on it then there is no need to upgrade the computer. Many people have more than one computer anyway, but you don't throw out all your computers and buy all new ones... you buy a new one for the latest games and keep the older computer for the kids to use (wreck).

Klimov design helicopter and RD-33 engines but it does not make them. Chem plant and MotorSch of Ukraine makes engine for them. and in budget they put money to transfer helicopter engines to Russia. Now where is the scale of investment there for RD engines.

The Klimov Plant - Federal State Unitary Enterprise in St Petersberg is listed as a manufacturer of the RD-33, the RD-133, the TV3-117, and the VK-2500 engines. The Motor Sich plant of the Ukraine makes R179-300, VK-21, R95TM-300, and R125-300 aeroengines.
Other manufacturers of the RD-33 in Russia include: Chernyshev Moscow Machine Building Enterprise JSC, and Omsk-based Baranov Motor Building Production Association.

With the Russian AF not even considering new Mig-29 like aircraft where is the incentive to improve engines in the Mig-29s weight class?

There is stronger engine firms like Saturn/Salyut for fighter engines. Two are good enough. Even in US they have two major suppliers.

They are not engine companies in the accepted sense... they are merely factories that made engines... there is no real competition as they both are working off someone elses product. The makers of Su-27 and Su-27UB make money from making the respective aircraft, but the design is from Sukhoi. What you are saying is that two factories that make these two slightly different flankers have enough expertise and experience to take over from Sukhoi... the company that designed the aircraft those factories merely made based on information supplied by Sukhoi... just because it was those factories that earned money from making those planes for foreign customers.

It makes rather more sense to join design companies and manufacturing companies along the lines in which they used to work together in. Tupolev didn't make fighters so join them with a fighter company like Mig and you get a company that can still make fighters and bombers. Join Illusion with Yakovlev and Sukhoi, so the Yak component of the new company can work on prop trainers and jet trainers, sukhoi can work on the 5th gen fighters and light strike aircraft and CAS aircraft, and Il can work on transport... there is little overlap and where there might be some at Yak working on fighters they can go over to the sukhoi department and help with any VSTOL designs they might have. The Engine and Radar and Avionics design bureaus can join the companies of the aircraft designers they tend to work with... Klimov = Mig, Saturn/Salyut = Sukhoi etc. This maintains the knowledge base of each company and retains competition because the former competitors are still in seperate companies. There might even be room for some direct competitors to join forces on some projects where the Russian AF benefits most from cooperation rather than competition.

PAK-FA needs to build in certain quantities to make it affordable for the Plant and it is alrady on Sukhoi webpage.

There is an economy of scale but lets not lose our heads. Simply making more does not immediately guarantee it will get cheaper to make each one. Trying to make too many at once will lead to a short heavy cost, while making them too slowly but saving money by reducing the number of factories that are tied up making one aircraft will lead to taking too long to get enough planes into service to make them viable. They need a balance where they are made in reasonable numbers... especially initially when the aircraft itself is largely an unknown.
Besides even if they made 1,000 of them... what on earth are they going to do with 1,000 stealth planes? It would be great at airshows... but what exactly are they going to do with that number of expensive large planes?

U cannot take resources from that try to maintian 400 obsolete fighters.

If they can do the job you need them for then they are not obsolete. You sound so American. If it isn't state of the art then it is junk and we don't want it even though it is mostly paid for already.

Ridiculous.

Saturn/Salyut/Perm/Klimov are the major and each have its own speciallity. why u think Klimov not invited to 5th generation engine?

Who is going to bother buying Russian stuff if anything less than the best gets no money? How many Mig-29s are there world wide? What happens when the new 5th gen engine is available... what export customer is going to want to buy a 5th generation fighter engine for their Flankers... especially when that engine costs probably 3 times more than the aircraft they bought it for?
Why would India keep Mig29s in service when the Russian AF wont? Why should it bother with Mig-35s... even though they can do the job... if the Russia AF doesn't want it?
Letting the US or France sell aircraft to India might be the biggest mistake Russia ever makes... their only alternatives for large sales have traditionally been the Russian AF and the Indians. When the Cold war ended and they were short of money and the west started giving the chinese the cold shoulder regarding military sales the Russians used chinese sales to keep some companies alive. Now you want to destroy those companies because they were supposed to make the small fighter in the large/small fighter competition. Mig gave the Russian AF exactly what it wanted in the Mig-29. When money has been scarce over the last decade and a half and they only had upgrades on existing aircraft to deal in both Mig and Sukhoi have only had their respective aircraft to work with. I would suggest that the Mig-35 is much further advanced than the Su-35. Its all round EO system and air to ground capability is much better even if its max flight range, max payload, and radar aperture are smaller the question is what difference does it make? When was the last time you saw an F-111 with 11 tons of stores on its way to a combat mission? How about the last time you saw an F-16 with 7 tons on its wings?
Never?

You talk about a new emphasis on inflight refuelling... surprise surprise... the smaller lighter planes with fewer weapons pylons benefit the most from inflight refuelling... because inflight refuelling extends flight range indefinitely and frees up weapon pylons.

odds are they they are looking it hypersonic class missiles with much extended ranges along with Glosnoss guided bombs.

Hypersonic long range weapons sound very expensive. If you look at the weapons shown with the MIG stealthy UAV... Kh-31 and Kh-58 with folding fins. Ironically the Kh-31 flys at 1km per second and Kh-58 is a mach 4 plus missile so they are actually close to hypersonic already.

Most of PGMs what u mentioned will retired.

Very few in service anyway.

SMT upgrades need new engines, airframe extension, avionics for ground hitting and new pilot training on cockpit procedures. It aint cheap and it will take time for MIG to ramp up production.

MIG doesn't make avionics, and those pilots are going to need that training either way. They don't need new engines right away. They could upgrade aircraft in storage and then swap out in service aircraft with upgraded machines. There doesn't need to be much disruption.

I just mentioning that they had money before thats why they are ahead in production technologies along with worker pay.

So spending money on SMT upgrades will also benefit production technologies within MIG.

why do u think all new engines with aircraft design put premium on reducing its signature and u need flight hours for proficient training.

The Mig-29 is an interceptor, not a stealth bomber. Half the time it will be in AB to get to an interception point rapidly... which means no smoke.

1980s era RD-33 engines are not going to allow it. u will lose pilots any way.

So they didn't train in the 1980s? German Mig-29s kept their old engines and even derated them and they worked just fine.

BTW it is interesting you bemoan the old engines in one breath and then claim the Russian AF can't afford the SMT upgrade because they would need new model engines... well if the smokey old engines are really that much of a problem they can buy new ones... if they aren't then they don't have to.

Russian claim that Su-34 is far better suited for its role than anyother aircraft for its role and role is properly defined. F-15E is Su-30MK2 not Su-34.

The Su-34 is a deep strike aircraft like the F-111. Like the F-15E is was based on the modified design of the contemporary large fighter of the day.

When those UAVs are supported by Fighters its alot harder to get close enough on them and fire short range missiles.

If you need to support UAVs with fighters... why not just use fighters? BTW escorting fighters will not stop MANPADs or BUKs.

u need long range sensors to find UAVs at greater ranges and use BVR in actual war. Not wasting Gas and aircraft to get close enough to each and every UAV flying around.

In war the rules are looser. Some unidentified aircraft takes off from enemy territory and flys along your coast you splash it... especially if it has a fighter escort.

UAVs are eyes in the sky with much longer loiter time, higher altitude and lower cost than Twin engines fighter or AWACS.

When you can guarantee airsuperiority then they are fine. In the real world however in 10 years time even some of the weakest air defences worth challanging will include high altitude SAMs.

u cannot assume that u will go after them with short range missiles or a gun.

You don't need 200km range AAMs to defeat UAVs.

U just cant wait highly Skilled wokers lying around wasting time and lose there skills for a decade untill PAK-FA enters production. U need constant work for factory for its long term future.

There are plenty of aircraft being built in Russia, there is plenty of opportunity for all makers of aircraft to get work and maintain skills while upgrading tools and methods.

And u cannot have AWACS every where and fighter radars give more powerful beam on narrow area to shoot down low rcs targets. both in air and ground. why do u think there is Ultra SAR mode in new radars?

There are plenty of ground based radars too. Unless you want to go to a war time footing with your aircraft then the extra coverage gained by your fighters will be not very effective. For a start more than 90% will be on the ground at any one time and of those that are airborne most will spend most of their time taking off and flying from one point to another with their radars pointed in useless directions... or simply turned off.

The era of MIG-21 size fighters is long gone.

Yeah... just like the era of the aircraft is gone now that we have SAM missiles, and the era of the tank is over now that we have ATGMs...

The thing is that Mig-21s are still in service around the world... and currently in greater numbers than Stealth aircraft... strangely enough.

Provided u can maintain operation readiness, pilot traing like Su-34 with Tu-22M3. u simply cannot compare the engine built now to what have been built 20 years ago.

Flight simulators can retain pilots skills without using engines...

Offcoures it makes less sense to build Su-27BM now because if u dont built that u will not be able to built PAK-FA in 10 years in sufficient quantity and ultimately the obsolete fighters will crash down because of old airframes/engines.

And when the SU-27BM turns out to be good enough to do the job is it possible that PAK-FA numbers might be reduced because they are really not needed? The German government was thinking about that when they retired their Mig-29s before they retired their F-4s.

why do u think it needs so many billions and new worker training just to start production of Civillian airline in Russia because old workers has retired and plants are not modernized and this take alot of investment and time.

Neither Flanker lines, nor MIG lines have been closed. MIG was delivering Mig-29SMTs to Algeria on time. Algeria just decided it wanted new aircraft as the basis.

Engines can be left out? u want those MIG-29 to become IAF MIG-21 crashing on Pilots with no hope of training.?

A mig-29 can fly and land safely with one engine shut down. Until they need to be replaced there is no need to replace them. The Russian AF has plenty of Jet trainer aircraft available now and soon to come on line some new models.

u have to understand this F-15/F-16 have better service life than Soviet built fighters.

BS. F-15s and F-16s are babied during peacetime... no high g flight, no supersonics at low level. The Russians have planes in storage... in storage... not scrapped... in storage. It is completely not the same thing. The Russians didn't put things in storage so they could be scrapped and replaced by completely different aircraft. If they were going to be scrapped they could be left in open storage and scavenged for parts. They weren't.
They still have hundreds of Mig-29s in service... they cannot make Su-35s fast enough to replace all those Migs and even if they could... the cost of the upgrade plus the changing of all the equipment at the mig 29 bases to operate flankers, plus retraining maintainence and pilots for the new aircraft will actually cost rather more than upgrading to SMT Migs.

U dont need thousands. u need couple of hundreds of each.

Unless you put 4 planes per airfield in Europe a couple of hundred of each type is a joke. One of the main reasons for dumping our Skyhawks was that they had two bases... one at Ohakea in NZ and one in Australia. If someone hijacked an aircraft at Dunedin airport and flew it into the Clutha dam they Skyhawks could do very little about it. Even if they were on standby 24/7 which would use up all their budget BTW, and flew down here the instant it happened they couldn't get to an intercept point before impact... and suddenly NZ loses 30 odd % of its power generation.

You don't save money by having fewer aircraft that have longer range and covering more area if that means they can't do the job.

ur assuming to much into the future. PAK-FA will be in production for 30 to 40 years just like JSF. MIG-29SMT does not have futre except for token numbers for export purposes.

First of all there are more Mig-29 operators than there are JSF operators. Second I am not suggesting that they keep the Mig-29 forever... they have it and an upgrade of what they have is cheaper than throwing it away and buying all new stuff that is only slightly better but much more expensive.

thats why they need highly efficient engines of 4000hr than 400hrs MIG-29 and spending workers time on overhaulds all the time.

The Russian AF has decided on its future fighter.. the PAK-FA. It doesn't need an interim fighter that will last in service for 40 years. It is an interim fighter... you are expecting it to be better than PAK-FA...

PAK-FA/Flanker crew will travel with them. No need to train MIG-29 crew with them.

No, you don't understand. Currently there are Mig-29 bases and Su-27 bases. If you are going to withdraw the Mig-29 then you need to retrain all those that operate the Mig-29 to use new (to them) aircraft. The Mig-29 and Mig-29SMT are basically the same aircraft, slightly upgraded. The Mig-29 and the Su-27BM are completely different aircraft... completely... different radars, different engines etc etc... even the IRST is different.

Su-27SM uses 3000 hrs engine rather than 400 hrs of MIG-29.

So you compare the upgraded engine to the unupgraded engine... congrats... more evidence that UPGRADEs are the way forward.

The question I am asking you is why do you think an upgraded Flanker is that much better than an upgraded Fulcrum. The military districts in European Russia are so small that an upgraded fulcrum doesn't need the range of a Flanker otherwise it will find itself out of its area. All that extra range is wasted when you need to concentrate your forces to meet threats of more than one or two enemy aircraft. If you need 100 aircraft in one area because it could be a main line of advance for NATO then having planes with 2000km flight radius makes no sense... unless you want them to fly to Iran when NATO attacks.

MIG-31 missile and radar range has been increased so it can take role over greater area.

Those Mig-29s will be operating with ground radar and AWACs and for most of the time will have their radars turned off or in listen mode.

It does not work that way. Even if u put engines from cannablized MIG-29. it will be used up in 3 to 4 years. or need constant overhauling. so whats the point.

They have kept them operating till now. I think they could manage to keep them operating for another 15 years with proper spares support.

and Russia is going to use Su-27SM/MIG-31 untill PAK-FA comes in sufficient numbers.

The Mig-31 doesn't come into it. They will use the Su-27SM and Su-27BM and the Mig-29 till the PAK-FA is sufficient in numbers... because that is what they are doing... unless they replace the Mig-29 with Su-27BM... which would be a huge waste of money.

[star49]

The Russian AF is in the same boat as the German AF... they have already decided what aircraft they want to move forward with... ie PAK-FA/Typhoon. There is no point in building brand new aircraft for the role of interim fighter if they already have aircraft that can do the job on hand. The have Mig-29s and Su-27s in large enough numbers to operate both for the two decades it will take to get PAK-FA into production and in service in sufficient numbers to cut existing types.

Russian AF is not at same boat as German. Protection of EU like Japan is guaranteed by US. Just look at European investment in US.
Russia has to look after its own Interests and they want the best of fighters. Interim fighter is necessary for preserving Industrial infrastructure along with Supply chian. U need train and experianced workers all the time.
U cannot jump all of sudden to the final product. MIG-29/Su-27 does not have two decades. At most 10 years. They are soviet built aircraft designed for low flying hours.

What other company anywhere around the world provides products or product upgrades to the government for free in peacetime? A companies job is to make money. This new company will be no different.

Sukhoi is government run firm with best designers left. Just look at how many managment changes in MIG in past 10 years alone. they have no continuity nor investment in production process.

By using up the engines they do have they can delay the time they need to buy new engines. Having an extra 400 Mig-29SMTs in service will guarantee extra aircraft are available for extra flight time at less cost than making an extra 400 Su-35s from scratch.

It will take 40 years to upgrade 400 MIG-29SMT. u need new radar with MTBF (not non functioning units of Soviet era), Engine wont survive. why do u think IAF got RD-33 license before MIG-29 upgrade sign up. It is very weak point.

Every type of aircraft needs maintainence and overhauls. Part of the SMT upgrade reduces maintainence costs by introducing onboard diagnostic equipment and replacing some parts with more durable materials.

That reduction in maintainace cost depends on producing new engines and that is costly part. AL-31FM engine has the same price as RD-33 because AL-31 is mass produced on new machinery.

That is very short sighted. Ignoring what you already have and spending money on something new when what you already have can do the job is stupid. If you have a Pentium III computer and all you do is play Solitaire on it then there is no need to upgrade the computer. Many people have more than one computer anyway, but you don't throw out all your computers and buy all new ones... you buy a new one for the latest games and keep the older computer for the kids to use (wreck).

What u already have needs alot of money to fly along with maintaince cost and it is draining money from other projects.

The Klimov Plant - Federal State Unitary Enterprise in St Petersberg is listed as a manufacturer of the RD-33, the RD-133, the TV3-117, and the VK-2500 engines. The Motor Sich plant of the Ukraine makes R179-300, VK-21, R95TM-300, and R125-300 aeroengines.
Other manufacturers of the RD-33 in Russia include: Chernyshev Moscow Machine Building Enterprise JSC, and Omsk-based Baranov Motor Building Production Association.

Only Chernysev plant can now produce RD-33. The rest are just on paper capability. Helicopter engine will be only produce after 2010. It is all with MotorSch.

With the Russian AF not even considering new Mig-29 like aircraft where is the incentive to improve engines in the Mig-29s weight class?

Incentive to improve came from Exports and buit over 15 years experiance. There is no way Russian AF is going to fund something from the bottom.

They are not engine companies in the accepted sense... they are merely factories that made engines... there is no real competition as they both are working off someone elses product. The makers of Su-27 and Su-27UB make money from making the respective aircraft, but the design is from Sukhoi. What you are saying is that two factories that make these two slightly different flankers have enough expertise and experience to take over from Sukhoi... the company that designed the aircraft those factories merely made based on information supplied by Sukhoi... just because it was those factories that earned money from making those planes for foreign customers.

It is the factories that are in power now. how u explain Sukhoi SSJ at Knaapo and MS-21 at Irkut. why not chose a MIG factory or Illysin factory?
Look at this statment. It is the President of a Factory whose is in charge of project with all the money and is subcontracting design work to Sukhoi for Wing design. It is the factory that has the money not the otherway around.

http://www.flightglobal.com/articles...diversify.html
ILA 2008: Irkut prepares to diversify
Traditionally associated with the production of military aircraft, the Irkut Corporation’s President, Oleg Demchenko, used ILA as a platform to highlight his company’s strategy for diversifying into civil aircraft production.
Irkut is putting out a tender for engine proposals in August, with engine selection scheduled for 2009. The company has already identified suitable engines from Pratt and Whitney and Rolls Royce, though Belchenko hinted strongly that the type would eventually be offered with a choice of Russian or Western engines.

The Sukhoi Design Bureau is expected to provide the composite wing, while Irkut anticipate that the fuselage will incorporate some international participation.
Irkut has received sufficient funding to launch the project, and Belchenko claimed that this was: “the first generously funded programme since the fall of the Soviet Union.”

It makes rather more sense to join design companies and manufacturing companies along the lines in which they used to work together in. Tupolev didn't make fighters so join them with a fighter company like Mig and you get a company that can still make fighters and bombers. Join Illusion with Yakovlev and Sukhoi, so the Yak component of the new company can work on prop trainers and jet trainers, sukhoi can work on the 5th gen fighters and light strike aircraft and CAS aircraft, and Il can work on transport... there is little overlap and where there might be some at Yak working on fighters they can go over to the sukhoi department and help with any VSTOL designs they might have. The Engine and Radar and Avionics design bureaus can join the companies of the aircraft designers they tend to work with... Klimov = Mig, Saturn/Salyut = Sukhoi etc. This maintains the knowledge base of each company and retains competition because the former competitors are still in seperate companies. There might even be room for some direct competitors to join forces on some projects where the Russian AF benefits most from cooperation rather than competition.

The point is Sukhoi factories along with Salyut/Saturn factories has all the expertize and money to hire the best and outsource the work to suppliers base. They arent interested in joing hands with some one which doesnot bring anything to the table. It is just waste of time and money.

There is an economy of scale but lets not lose our heads. Simply making more does not immediately guarantee it will get cheaper to make each one. Trying to make too many at once will lead to a short heavy cost, while making them too slowly but saving money by reducing the number of factories that are tied up making one aircraft will lead to taking too long to get enough planes into service to make them viable. They need a balance where they are made in reasonable numbers... especially initially when the aircraft itself is largely an unknown.

there are three large Sukhoi factories Knaapo/IAPO/NAPO and it is enough for most of the work. It is these factores along that exported 500 flankers not MiG factores. and it is these factores that are modernized to produce more than 1000 fighters along with upgrades. There is no point in giving money anywhere else to start from scratch.

Besides even if they made 1,000 of them... what on earth are they going to do with 1,000 stealth planes? It would be great at airshows... but what exactly are they going to do with that number of expensive large planes?

1000 Stealth will give Ruaf alot of confidence to deal with alot of countries at same time and they have plenty of business rivals around the world. When any third world country with natural resources try to play hard ball with Russia they can send this stealth planes with impunity and shoot down the whole airforce with no losses.

If they can do the job you need them for then they are not obsolete. You sound so American. If it isn't state of the art then it is junk and we don't want it even though it is mostly paid for already.

I think u havent wakeup to new reality. Russia is now even more ruthless capitalist country in policies than US/China combined. It is just the military readiness not there to implement.

Who is going to bother buying Russian stuff if anything less than the best gets no money? How many Mig-29s are there world wide? What happens when the new 5th gen engine is available... what export customer is going to want to buy a 5th generation fighter engine for their Flankers... especially when that engine costs probably 3 times more than the aircraft they bought it for?
Why would India keep Mig29s in service when the Russian AF wont? Why should it bother with Mig-35s... even though they can do the job... if the Russia AF doesn't want it?

Russia isnt bother by export customers when future product line up is concerned. Even they want to decrease helicopter exports from 2011 after. Hightech machinery are for domestic use only and for Export just raw materials or Civillian stuff. No more high end weopons or charge price for high end weopons that no one can pay.

Letting the US or France sell aircraft to India might be the biggest mistake Russia ever makes... their only alternatives for large sales have traditionally been the Russian AF and the Indians. When the Cold war ended and they were short of money and the west started giving the chinese the cold shoulder regarding military sales the Russians used chinese sales to keep some companies alive. Now you want to destroy those companies because they were supposed to make the small fighter in the large/small fighter competition. Mig gave the Russian AF exactly what it wanted in the Mig-29. When money has been scarce over the last decade and a half and they only had upgrades on existing aircraft to deal in both Mig and Sukhoi have only had their respective aircraft to work with. I would suggest that the Mig-35 is much further advanced than the Su-35. Its all round EO system and air to ground capability is much better even if its max flight range, max payload, and radar aperture are smaller the question is what difference does it make? When was the last time you saw an F-111 with 11 tons of stores on its way to a combat mission? How about the last time you saw an F-16 with 7 tons on its wings?
Never?

Both US/France will lose money in long term selling fighter to India. They dont have any idea what is coming up. There is no doubt Su-35 is better fighter as far as sophisitcation and build quality is concerned.

You talk about a new emphasis on inflight refuelling... surprise surprise... the smaller lighter planes with fewer weapons pylons benefit the most from inflight refuelling... because inflight refuelling extends flight range indefinitely and frees up weapon pylons.

Smaller fighter does not benefit the most. u to refuel them multiple times due smaller internal fuel capacity.

Hypersonic long range weapons sound very expensive. If you look at the weapons shown with the MIG stealthy UAV... Kh-31 and Kh-58 with folding fins. Ironically the Kh-31 flys at 1km per second and Kh-58 is a mach 4 plus missile so they are actually close to hypersonic already.

Weopons shown are for export for smaller fighers/UAVs. What is the weopons tested with Su-34?

MIG doesn't make avionics, and those pilots are going to need that training either way. They don't need new engines right away. They could upgrade aircraft in storage and then swap out in service aircraft with upgraded machines. There doesn't need to be much disruption.

This today report. Why he is not deploying MIG-29?

http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=55533&cid=25
MOSCOW, June 4. (ИТАР-ТАСС). (ITAR-TASS). The Russian air base in Kyrgyzstan Kante added in the near future several new aircraft Su-27, told journalists the Russian air force chief Colonel General Alexander Zelin.
". "I have decided that the base shortly be reinforced with four training-fighting vehicles from Krasnodar aviation school - he said. - In the near future we will be able to proceed with the preparation of active pilots among youth at the airbase." По словам главкома, "". According to glavkoma, "Kante deployed in several aircraft Su-25 and Su-27, training aircraft L-39 and Mi-8 helicopters." "В скором времени мы ожидаем поступление транспортного самолета Ан-26, нескольких новых самолетов Су-27", - подчеркнул Зелин. "Soon we expect the flow of transport aircraft An-26, several new aircraft Su-27" - stressed Zelin

[/quote]

So spending money on SMT upgrades will also benefit production technologies within MIG.

And whats the benefit for Ruaf in learning by MIG when Sukhoi already got these a decade ago through exports?

The Mig-29 is an interceptor, not a stealth bomber. Half the time it will be in AB to get to an interception point rapidly... which means no smoke.

MIG-29 is equiped with Soviet era engines that are even worse than original AL-31F let alone AL-31FM-1. No point in starting old car.

So they didn't train in the 1980s? German Mig-29s kept their old engines and even derated them and they worked just fine.

they have agreement of spare engines with MIG.

BTW it is interesting you bemoan the old engines in one breath and then claim the Russian AF can't afford the SMT upgrade because they would need new model engines... well if the smokey old engines are really that much of a problem they can buy new ones... if they aren't then they don't have to.

They need to concentrate on Improving AL-31FM-1 and 117S engine not 1980s era engine. there is no point in wasting time and money to bring it current level when u can go much further with money.

The Su-34 is a deep strike aircraft like the F-111. Like the F-15E is was based on the modified design of the contemporary large fighter of the day.

Su-34 is much indepth modification thats why it has separate factory very differetn nose size, weights and tail sting along with titanium armou plates.
It is not Su-30MK2. F-15E is much closer to F-15C than Su-34 to Su-27SM.

If you need to support UAVs with fighters... why not just use fighters? BTW escorting fighters will not stop MANPADs or BUKs.

Fighters use alot of gas. UAVs are cheaper to operate, much higher loiter time (reaching 24hrs almost). Fly much higher for sustained period, much more stealtiers. UAV is like Satellie observing an area. Fighers can do sead operation to protect UAVs at higher altitude.

In war the rules are looser. Some unidentified aircraft takes off from enemy territory and flys along your coast you splash it... especially if it has a fighter escort.

But if that fighter is better than urs. u will not be able to do anything. and there is chance that shorter life MIG-29 will fall down by itself.

When you can guarantee airsuperiority then they are fine. In the real world however in 10 years time even some of the weakest air defences worth challanging will include high altitude SAMs.

High altitudd SAMS requires radars to target it. Airborne jammers are now very powerful. What do u think about Nanotech? (Much beyond than Silicon).

You don't need 200km range AAMs to defeat UAVs.

When those UAV are protected by fighers with AIM-120D/Meteor?

There are plenty of aircraft being built in Russia, there is plenty of opportunity for all makers of aircraft to get work and maintain skills while upgrading tools and methods.

You are wrong on this. It is not Soviet era that just every one can design and build aircraft on modern standards.

There are plenty of ground based radars too. Unless you want to go to a war time footing with your aircraft then the extra coverage gained by your fighters will be not very effective. For a start more than 90% will be on the ground at any one time and of those that are airborne most will spend most of their time taking off and flying from one point to another with their radars pointed in useless directions... or simply turned off.

u cannot take ur ground based radars to Africa/Middleast or in International waters. u need very powerful fighter radars to do the work indenpendtly in offensive operations. Why MIG-31BM /Su-34/Su-27SM are part of upgrade but not MIG-29?

Yeah... just like the era of the aircraft is gone now that we have SAM missiles, and the era of the tank is over now that we have ATGMs...

The thing is that Mig-21s are still in service around the world... and currently in greater numbers than Stealth aircraft... strangely enough.

those MIG-21 are of no use for the kind of rival Russia is going to face. Flying MIG-21 is better for scrap yard rather than overhaling engine every 100 hours.

Flight simulators can retain pilots skills without using engines...

to a certain extent.

And when the SU-27BM turns out to be good enough to do the job is it possible that PAK-FA numbers might be reduced because they are really not needed? The German government was thinking about that when they retired their Mig-29s before they retired their F-4s.

Nope. Su-27BM production will be stoped at the factory when PAK-FA production starts just as there is no new Su-24 built up when Su-34 started. Germany is not Russia. they dont have settled scores with anyone.

Neither Flanker lines, nor MIG lines have been closed. MIG was delivering Mig-29SMTs to Algeria on time. Algeria just decided it wanted new aircraft as the basis.

they were bad quality with high price. Whats the point of buying SMT when 15 years later ur going to dispose off. New Flankers have 40 years life with less overhaul.

A mig-29 can fly and land safely with one engine shut down. Until they need to be replaced there is no need to replace them. The Russian AF has plenty of Jet trainer aircraft available now and soon to come on line some new models.

MIG-29 cannot go further with fuel.

BS. F-15s and F-16s are babied during peacetime... no high g flight, no supersonics at low level. The Russians have planes in storage... in storage... not scrapped... in storage. It is completely not the same thing. The Russians didn't put things in storage so they could be scrapped and replaced by completely different aircraft. If they were going to be scrapped they could be left in open storage and scavenged for parts. They weren't.
They still have hundreds of Mig-29s in service... they cannot make Su-35s fast enough to replace all those Migs and even if they could... the cost of the upgrade plus the changing of all the equipment at the mig 29 bases to operate flankers, plus retraining maintainence and pilots for the new aircraft will actually cost rather more than upgrading to SMT Migs.

F-15/F-16 were constantly flying maintaing no fly zone over Irak and have plenty of exercises from red Flag to various countries. how many Times Ruaf has done on similar scale with MIG-29? Even IAF only Mirage 2000/Su-30 went on foregin visits. I want to See MIG-29 going abroad. Time has changed they arent interested in MIG-29.

Unless you put 4 planes per airfield in Europe a couple of hundred of each type is a joke. One of the main reasons for dumping our Skyhawks was that they had two bases... one at Ohakea in NZ and one in Australia. If someone hijacked an aircraft at Dunedin airport and flew it into the Clutha dam they Skyhawks could do very little about it. Even if they were on standby 24/7 which would use up all their budget BTW, and flew down here the instant it happened they couldn't get to an intercept point before impact... and suddenly NZ loses 30 odd % of its power generation.
You don't save money by having fewer aircraft that have longer range and covering more area if that means they can't do the job.

Why they canot do the job? Su-35 has faster acceleration. So it wil respond faster to any event. it will need less bases so less money to spend. it will have longer range missile. so shoot from far away. not to mention better long range sensors with more powerful EW suite. there is no point in medium size fighter in todays world.

First of all there are more Mig-29 operators than there are JSF operators. Second I am not suggesting that they keep the Mig-29 forever... they have it and an upgrade of what they have is cheaper than throwing it away and buying all new stuff that is only slightly better but much more expensive.

Who operates MIG-29 around the World is irrelevant to decision making of Ruaf. why not Ruaf announce MIG-35 purchase? just like Sukhoi PAK-FA? JSF operators countries are in different financial status than MIG-29 operators.

The Russian AF has decided on its future fighter.. the PAK-FA. It doesn't need an interim fighter that will last in service for 40 years. It is an interim fighter... you are expecting it to be better than PAK-FA...

I didnot say that interim fighter is better than PAK-FA. Interim fighter is necessary to certain extent for PAK-FA. why do u think they are using 117S engines on PAK-FA but not RD-33?

No, you don't understand. Currently there are Mig-29 bases and Su-27 bases. If you are going to withdraw the Mig-29 then you need to retrain all those that operate the Mig-29 to use new (to them) aircraft. The Mig-29 and Mig-29SMT are basically the same aircraft, slightly upgraded. The Mig-29 and the Su-27BM are completely different aircraft... completely... different radars, different engines etc etc... even the IRST is different.

MIG-29 bases will be gradually withdrawn as more upgraded Flankers available. Newer fighters will be less maintaince intensive than Soviet era fighers.

So you compare the upgraded engine to the unupgraded engine... congrats... more evidence that UPGRADEs are the way forward.

Those upgrades are already paid for and those upgrades are necessary for fifth generation engines. How can u produce AL-31FM-3 when there is no AL-31-FM-1? there is no future for RD-33 as far as fifth generation funding is concerned. so why bother with upgrades.

The question I am asking you is why do you think an upgraded Flanker is that much better than an upgraded Fulcrum. The military districts in European Russia are so small that an upgraded fulcrum doesn't need the range of a Flanker otherwise it will find itself out of its area. All that extra range is wasted when you need to concentrate your forces to meet threats of more than one or two enemy aircraft. If you need 100 aircraft in one area because it could be a main line of advance for NATO then having planes with 2000km flight radius makes no sense... unless you want them to fly to Iran when NATO attacks.

Because upraded Flanker has better equiped Factories behind it and most of upgrades are already paid off through exports. there will be no IRBIS without BARS. and certianly Flanker is much better fighter than Fulcrum in all respects. 9.4ton fuel will give u 3600KM range but 5500KG SMT is only good for 2000KM.

Those Mig-29s will be operating with ground radar and AWACs and for most of the time will have their radars turned off or in listen mode.

AWACS cannot be every where. and more poweful radars in fighters are difficult to jam.

They have kept them operating till now. I think they could manage to keep them operating for another 15 years with proper spares support.

they were in storage untill recently. they cannot operate for 15 years when u actually fly them with decent flight hours.

The Mig-31 doesn't come into it. They will use the Su-27SM and Su-27BM and the Mig-29 till the PAK-FA is sufficient in numbers... because that is what they are doing... unless they replace the Mig-29 with Su-27BM... which would be a huge waste of money.

MIG-31BM upgrades is part of there budget so why doesnt it come into it? and they are developing ultralong range Project 810 missile for PAK-FA. So there is role for that capability in future. Waste of money is operating obsolete fighter like MIG-29 just like MIG-21 in certain countries.

[flex297]

1000 Stealth will give Ruaf alot of confidence to deal with alot of countries at same time and they have plenty of business rivals around the world. When any third world country with natural resources try to play hard ball with Russia they can send this stealth planes with impunity and shoot down the whole airforce with no losses.

LOL. Do you think 1000+ stealth fighters would have helped you in Afghanistan? Looks like you need another hard lesson, buddy.

[star49]

LOL. Do you think 1000+ stealth fighters would have helped you in Afghanistan? Looks like you need another hard lesson, buddy.

Why not? with 1000 Long range Stealth Fighters u can directly sent Saudi/pak airforces to stone age along with complete destrcution of there economic infrastructure. u can enforce no fly zone both over the sea and land at much greater ranges against any opponent.
u have to esclated conflict to such level that no one comes to the aid of the opponents and that what Russia is trying to achieve. They arent interested in short range abiltiy with limited range weopons, small self protection suites/sensors. and i doubt they are going settle for anything less when u have all the money and natural resources to accomplish.

[GarryB]

Russian AF is not at same boat as German. Protection of EU like Japan is guaranteed by US.

You think the security of Russia will be guaranteed by a few stealth fighters?

Russias security in regard to NATO is the SS-18, SS-19, and TOPOL and TOPOL-M.
Against anyone and everyone else Flankers Foxhounds and Fulcrums are plenty good enough and will be for the next 20 years if properly upgraded.

The Russian AF has different requirements. It needs operational some fighters. It can either give existing fighters a modest upgrade, or it can replace half of its existing aircraft and replace them with new builds to tide them over till the PAK-FA is ready and then build a whole lot more planes that are even more expensive. The tollerances of a 5th gen stealth aircraft suggest to me that most of its construction will not be a guy with a rubber mallet... it will be a guy standing looking at computer screens while a robot does the cutting and assembly.

MIG-29/Su-27 does not have two decades. At most 10 years. They are soviet built aircraft designed for low flying hours.

Yes, soviet aircraft were built for war not peacetime. However just changing from timetabled replacement of parts to inspection and replacement of parts when they actually need replacing has doubled or tripled the life span of many parts without any actual changes in use... the original lifespans were simply too conservative in the first place.
New built in diagnostic equipment will add to the life span of parts too as will new replacement procedures.

Sukhoi is government run firm with best designers left. Just look at how many managment changes in MIG in past 10 years alone. they have no continuity nor investment in production process.

And what is your position exactly within the Sukhoi marketting department?

MIG... which is not MiG anymore BTW, could change its management team every two weeks... it doesn't matter. The business model they follow from this week to the next is irrelevant as they wont be managing the business for much longer... it will be part of another company soon enough. The issue is the workers and the assets... computers, robots, materials skill. etc.

It will take 40 years to upgrade 400 MIG-29SMT.

Why on earth do you think that? If the upgrade is properly funded it should take 3-4 years to upgrade 200 odd Mig-29s to SMT level.

u need new radar with MTBF (not non functioning units of Soviet era)

Perhaps you are confusing a properly maintained Russian radar for a Serbian aircraft radar whose replacement parts were sold off in a criminal racket to make someone rich. The Germans didn't seem to have anything bad to say about the radar of the Mig-29. Just its radius of action was a problem for them because they going a downgraded export model and didn't bother with any of the upgrades... the T in SMT means fuel BTW.

AL-31FM engine has the same price as RD-33 because AL-31 is mass produced on new machinery.

Evidence?

What u already have needs alot of money to fly along with maintaince cost and it is draining money from other projects.

The SMT upgrade reduces maintainence costs of the Mig-29 by up to 40%. The fact that they haven't chosen to upgrade till now suggests they were prepared to pay increased maintainence costs because they didn't need the extra performance.

Only Chernysev plant can now produce RD-33. The rest are just on paper capability. Helicopter engine will be only produce after 2010. It is all with MotorSch.

Why would they transfer all their engine production to a foreign country? Motor Sich is in the Ukraine. If the Ukrainian government gets its way it will be a NATO country too soon enough.

Incentive to improve came from Exports and buit over 15 years experiance. There is no way Russian AF is going to fund something from the bottom.

Over a longer timescale the pervious Sukhoi fighters have been mediocre at best. And their habit of new designations for basically the same aircraft is not something new either. The Su-9 and Su-11 are not that different (and both look like Mig-21s). Su-7 is similar as well and it became an Su-17 and then Su-20 and Su-22 for no apparant reason. The Su-15 and Su-21 differ mostly in their wing planform. Otherwise their better aircraft, the Su-24 and Su-25 are actually good planes and do what they are advertised to do.

Look at this statment. It is the President of a Factory whose is in charge of project with all the money and is subcontracting design work to Sukhoi for Wing design. It is the factory that has the money not the otherway around.

Exactly... you have factory managers running design bureaus now... if that isn't the horses **** leading the way I don't know what is. What would a factory manager know about anything other than upgrades of existing designs... by your business model the PAK-FA will be the last Russian fighter and all future Russian fighters will be upgrades of in service types and the PAK-FA.

The point is Sukhoi factories along with Salyut/Saturn factories has all the expertize and money to hire the best and outsource the work to suppliers base. They arent interested in joing hands with some one which doesnot bring anything to the table. It is just waste of time and money.

By joining hands with other design bureaus they add depth to their product range. Kamov would add Naval helos for example, Mil would add Army attack and transport helos, Tupolev would add bombers but might also contribute to UAVs and also transport aircraft... Antonov is in the Ukraine and couldn't join...

and it is these factores that are modernized to produce more than 1000 fighters along with upgrades. There is no point in giving money anywhere else to start from scratch.

Mig factories have been upgrading East European Mig-29s and also producing some Mig-29s and upgrading others too. I remember reading that one Mig factory also made a light transport that was being bought. Mig is also making the Skat stealthy UAV too.

1000 Stealth will give Ruaf alot of confidence to deal with alot of countries at same time and they have plenty of business rivals around the world.

It would put them in the poor house too and lead to foreign companies coming in and buying up a lot of weak joint stock companies for cheap prices.

When any third world country with natural resources try to play hard ball with Russia they can send this stealth planes with impunity and shoot down the whole airforce with no losses.

So you want Russia to become America... why? And after you shoot down that countries AF what do you intend to do? When in history has a country suddenly been friends with another country and traded with it after that first country had wiped out its airforce? And if you want to say Germany or Japan then you forget the required invasion and reprogramming of the public necessary.

It is just the military readiness not there to implement.

And it is never going to be there if they p!ss away what resources they do have for assets they don't need.

Hightech machinery are for domestic use only and for Export just raw materials or Civillian stuff.

An economy that imports raw materials and processes them into high value, high tech material sounds like Japan when it was economically powerful. A country that exports only raw materials sounds like any third world country being stripped by a foreign colonial power.

Smaller fighter does not benefit the most. u to refuel them multiple times due smaller internal fuel capacity.

Of course it benefits most. Its problem is range and inflight refuelling makes range no longer an issue.

And whats the benefit for Ruaf in learning by MIG when Sukhoi already got these a decade ago through exports?

Because there is a huge range of technologies in a modern fighter aircraft. Sukhoi is in a good political position merely because the plane they made was bigger. If the MIG design bureau had built the bigger plane then it would be the flanker that you were talking about removing from service. The fact that the Su-27 was bigger than the Mig-29 does not make it better in every way. The Su-35 does not have the EO capabilities of the Mig-35 and would need a targetting pod to engage ground targets with its EO system above its nose it is in the wrong place for ground targets.

MIG-29 is equiped with Soviet era engines that are even worse than original AL-31F let alone AL-31FM-1. No point in starting old car.

There is just as much room for growth in the RD-33 as there is in the Al-31.

They need to concentrate on Improving AL-31FM-1 and 117S engine not 1980s era engine. there is no point in wasting time and money to bring it current level when u can go much further with money.

You make it sound like the RD-33 has been standing still and has not been improved too.

F-15E is much closer to F-15C than Su-34 to Su-27SM.

Which made it cheaper to make than a more indepth change like the Su-34.

Fighters use alot of gas.

But you said UAVs need fighter escort... so fighters are burning gas and the UAVs they are protecting are burning gas. Why not just send the fighters with a targeting pod to do the job of looking for the enemy? If you have airsuperiority then a plane like a Tu-22M3 with some sort of optics surveillance package in its bomb bay would make much more sense it could loiter for hours and run away if needed. Or an Il-76 AWACs model with added EO sensors in pods under the wings. Powerful radar and jammer and EO capability all in one... or M-17 Myasechev (spelling).

Fly much higher for sustained period, much more stealtiers.

The quality of optics you can put in what is a disposable aircraft like a UAV is limited. A proper manned aircraft could have much better optics and fly much higher than a UAV... except for the really big UAVs but they cost a small fortune.

But if that fighter is better than urs. u will not be able to do anything. and there is chance that shorter life MIG-29 will fall down by itself.

If the fighter is better than yours... ie it was a Russian UAV and the Mig-29 was a Russian plane escorting it into Georgian territory and the Georgians only have the Su-25 to intercept, then they would have to use SAMs or simply smoke on the ground to hide targets they don't want to be seen.

High altitudd SAMS requires radars to target it. Airborne jammers are now very powerful.

Most radar guided missiles can operate in home on jam modes. Most Russian radar guided SAMs have a TV guided backup mode too. With an autotracker it can be easily effective at high altitudes.

When those UAV are protected by fighers with AIM-120D/Meteor?

How many countries have such weapons. And when was the last time such a weapon was used anywhere near its max range?
Any Russian fighter shot down near its border while trying to intercept a UAV of any nationality over Russian territory could be considered an act of war... exactly which country would risk that?

It is not Soviet era that just every one can design and build aircraft on modern standards.

No, in Russia there are really only 2-3 companies that could manage a 5th gen fighter... Mig, Sukhoi, and possibly Yakovlev with their Yak-43.
But you want them to have only one... Sukhoi.

u cannot take ur ground based radars to Africa/Middleast or in International waters.

Of course you can... some of the best ground radars the Russians have at the moment are part of the S-300V and S-400 SAM systems. In some terms they are directly comparable to AEGIS radars.

And when they get around to building 6 carriers they will need AEGIS class like cruisers to support such carrier groups.

Why MIG-31BM /Su-34/Su-27SM are part of upgrade but not MIG-29?

Only you say the Mig-29 are not. Show me some reports declaring the Russian AF will get rid of all its Mig-29s in service and in storage and I will start believing what you say.

Flying MIG-21 is better for scrap yard rather than overhaling engine every 100 hours.

The Mig-21 is actually easy and cheap to operate and maintain. That is why there are a few privately owned Mig-21s. You will never see a privately owned Mig-29 or Su-27 because they are just too expensive to justify.

just as there is no new Su-24 built up when Su-34 started.

Su-24 upgrades continue till there are sufficient Su-34s to replace them. Just as I would suggest the Mig-29 and Su-27 will be upgraded and used for the decade or more it will take to get the PAK-FA into service.

they were bad quality with high price. Whats the point of buying SMT when 15 years later ur going to dispose off.

There was nothing at all wrong with the Mig-29SMTs delivered to Algeria. Algeria just assumed they were getting new aircraft. The returned aircraft were tested and found to be perfectly fine.

F-15/F-16 were constantly flying maintaing no fly zone over Irak and have plenty of exercises from red Flag to various countries. how many Times Ruaf has done on similar scale with MIG-29?

Just flying normal patrols without accelerating to high speed at low level, or pulling high gs is the bread and butter of any fighter aircraft... it should extend the life of the fighter rather than shorten it. The fact that the Mig-29 has only operated as a patrol aircraft around Russia in rather harsher weather extremes than in northern Iraq (when was the last time it was -40 degrees at sea level in Iraq?) suggests there are plenty more flight hours left in the Russian aircraft... unlike the US aircraft, whose wings are falling off.

Why they canot do the job? Su-35 has faster acceleration. So it wil respond faster to any event. it will need less bases so less money to spend.

The Su-35 might have faster acceleration but that will just burn more fuel. The point of an interceptor is to intercept. If you try to reduce the number of bases and lengthen the distance the interceptor has to fly then you increase the size of gaps in your defences for enemy to exploit.

Needless to say the Su-27 and Mig-29 have the same top speed but if you make the comparison with missiles, an SA-17 might only reach out to 50km range while an S-400 might reach to 400km. You don't deploy SA-17s 50km apart... they need an overlap so if you put them 40km apart that gives you better coverage. If you think you can replace those SA-17s with S-400s by putting them 300km apart then you have to keep in mind that if both missiles travelled at the same speed that a target flying directly between two S-400 sites will be 300km from either set of missiles. By the time the missile has travelled out 300km that target might be well past the danger area and at the edge of the engagement zone... especially if it is supercruising.
With the on paper less capable SA-17s the distance to the target is shorter but the distance to the next airbase is also shorter too so the target, unless they are an SR-71 is not going to be as far through the airspace when the interceptor arrives. Equally an SA-17 can be based much closer to the border without creating problems than the S-400 can.

it will have longer range missile.

Why do you think the Su-27BM will carry a longer range missile than a Mig-29SMT could carry? Remember the longest range AAM in service in the RuAF is on a Mig, not a Sukhoi.

JSF operators countries are in different financial status than MIG-29 operators

Russia is a Mig-29 operator and has no JSFs

why do u think they are using 117S engines on PAK-FA but not RD-33?

Because the RD-33 is intended for a lighter fighter than the PAK-FA is going to be. Just as the makers of the AL-31 talk about increasing thrust by several tons per engine the makers of the RD-33 talk about future 10 ton and 12 ton thrust models.

Newer fighters will be less maintaince intensive than Soviet era fighers.

But the Mig-29SMT is one of those post Soviet designs that is less maintainence intensive like the Su-27SM

there is no future for RD-33 as far as fifth generation funding is concerned. so why bother with upgrades.

Because there are other users of the engine including currently the Russian AF. Don't you think that while the Al-31 makers have been working on upgrades that the makers of the RD-33 have been working just as hard on their engine?

9.4ton fuel will give u 3600KM range but 5500KG SMT is only good for 2000KM.

Figures I have show 3,400km for Su-35 and 2,100km for Mig-29SMT. Whip out the calculator and that shows 2.765 ratio for the Su-35 and 2.61 for the Mig-29SMT... win to the Mig-29 it seems.

AWACS cannot be every where. and more poweful radars in fighters are difficult to jam.

Even powerful radars are not used all the time. Giving your position away like that is bad for your life expectancy.

they cannot operate for 15 years when u actually fly them with decent flight hours.

4,000 airframe hours = 40 years of flight. for 15 years of operations they just need 1,500 hours left on the clock... and that is without any overhaul at all... and these aircraft have very few hours on the clock... no northern no fly zone to police etc etc.

MIG-31BM upgrades is part of there budget so why doesnt it come into it?

The Mig-31BM doesn't come into it because it is an interceptor only. It will hardly be used in short range strike missions.

[star49]

You think the security of Russia will be guaranteed by a few stealth fighters?

Why not. Everywar does not need nuclear weopons. Stealth fighters have alot Sustain speed (supercrusie with low fuel consumption) and can do surgical strikes.

Russias security in regard to NATO is the SS-18, SS-19, and TOPOL and TOPOL-M.

That only with US. With smaller nations it will be using stealth fighters.

Against anyone and everyone else Flankers Foxhounds and Fulcrums are plenty good enough and will be for the next 20 years if properly upgraded.

Soviet built fighters does not have 20 years life without airframe and engine upgrades.

The Russian AF has different requirements. It needs operational some fighters. It can either give existing fighters a modest upgrade, or it can replace half of its existing aircraft and replace them with new builds to tide them over till the PAK-FA is ready and then build a whole lot more planes that are even more expensive. The tollerances of a 5th gen stealth aircraft suggest to me that most of its construction will not be a guy with a rubber mallet... it will be a guy standing looking at computer screens while a robot does the cutting and assembly.

Russian airforce clearly knows its requirements thats why it is concentrating on Su-27SM/BM/Su-34/PAK-FA. Both in terms of suppliers base/industrial commonality/engine commanality etc. I can assume new built Su-35BM will take the role even from MIG-31 as it has supercruise, long range sensors, better range etc.

Yes, soviet aircraft were built for war not peacetime. However just changing from timetabled replacement of parts to inspection and replacement of parts when they actually need replacing has doubled or tripled the life span of many parts without any actual changes in use... the original lifespans were simply too conservative in the first place.
New built in diagnostic equipment will add to the life span of parts too as will new replacement procedures.

Soviet methods depends on large conscript personal which may not be available so only centeralized maintaince at few places can be done. u cannot spread maintainance personal on hundreds of airbases where aircraft land.

And what is your position exactly within the Sukhoi marketting department?

MIG... which is not MiG anymore BTW, could change its management team every two weeks... it doesn't matter. The business model they follow from this week to the next is irrelevant as they wont be managing the business for much longer... it will be part of another company soon enough. The issue is the workers and the assets... computers, robots, materials skill. etc.

When u dont have continuity of management. No bonuses, no Experiance workers left, no foreign country training,no updating of production equipment, no continuity with supplier bases etc.

Why on earth do you think that? If the upgrade is properly funded it should take 3-4 years to upgrade 200 odd Mig-29s to SMT level.

so ur upgrading 3 or 4 years to upgrade 200 MIG-29SMT? it isnot gone happen. It will take alteast 5 years to upgrad IAF 60 MIG-29s with already engine agreement in place.

Perhaps you are confusing a properly maintained Russian radar for a Serbian aircraft radar whose replacement parts were sold off in a criminal racket to make someone rich. The Germans didn't seem to have anything bad to say about the radar of the Mig-29. Just its radius of action was a problem for them because they going a downgraded export model and didn't bother with any of the upgrades... the T in SMT means fuel BTW.

T in SMT also means more MTOW which needs airframe beefup with better engines.

Evidence?

Evidence is clear with Chinese export contracts. AL-31FM has similar price as RD-33 series 3.

The SMT upgrade reduces maintainence costs of the Mig-29 by up to 40%. The fact that they haven't chosen to upgrade till now suggests they were prepared to pay increased maintainence costs because they didn't need the extra performance.

SMT needs new engines.

Why would they transfer all their engine production to a foreign country? Motor Sich is in the Ukraine. If the Ukrainian government gets its way it will be a NATO country too soon enough.

MotorSch make alll the engines for Klimov helis. and it will take time to bring production back.

Over a longer timescale the pervious Sukhoi fighters have been mediocre at best. And their habit of new designations for basically the same aircraft is not something new either. The Su-9 and Su-11 are not that different (and both look like Mig-21s). Su-7 is similar as well and it became an Su-17 and then Su-20 and Su-22 for no apparant reason. The Su-15 and Su-21 differ mostly in their wing planform. Otherwise their better aircraft, the Su-24 and Su-25 are actually good planes and do what they are advertised to do.

Sukhoi fighers are always better than MIG. Su-24/Su25/Su-27 are staying and have role to play. where is MIG-27/MIG-29 role?

Exactly... you have factory managers running design bureaus now... if that isn't the horses **** leading the way I don't know what is. What would a factory manager know about anything other than upgrades of existing designs... by your business model the PAK-FA will be the last Russian fighter and all future Russian fighters will be upgrades of in service types and the PAK-FA.

Factory managers all that matters. PAK-FA will be the last man fighter in Russia.

By joining hands with other design bureaus they add depth to their product range. Kamov would add Naval helos for example, Mil would add Army attack and transport helos, Tupolev would add bombers but might also contribute to UAVs and also transport aircraft... Antonov is in the Ukraine and couldn't join...

Those design bureaus have nothing to offer to Sukhoi.

Mig factories have been upgrading East European Mig-29s and also producing some Mig-29s and upgrading others too. I remember reading that one Mig factory also made a light transport that was being bought. Mig is also making the Skat stealthy UAV too.

Those upgrade are not upto sukhoi standard. and every customer knows that.

So you want Russia to become America... why? And after you shoot down that countries AF what do you intend to do? When in history has a country suddenly been friends with another country and traded with it after that first country had wiped out its airforce? And if you want to say Germany or Japan then you forget the required invasion and reprogramming of the public necessary.

I am not going into further discuss it. If Russia has to successful it will follow American way.

An economy that imports raw materials and processes them into high value, high tech material sounds like Japan when it was economically powerful. A country that exports only raw materials sounds like any third world country being stripped by a foreign colonial power.

u need energy and workers to process raw materials into final product. Which needs global supply chain of parts for export and import. Raw materials country with strong military industrial complex will always have the upper hand on consumer societies like China/Japan.

Of course it benefits most. Its problem is range and inflight refuelling makes range no longer an issue.

so do u think Su-35/Su-34/MIG-29 has the same range with on one inflight refuelling?

Because there is a huge range of technologies in a modern fighter aircraft. Sukhoi is in a good political position merely because the plane they made was bigger. If the MIG design bureau had built the bigger plane then it would be the flanker that you were talking about removing from service. The fact that the Su-27 was bigger than the Mig-29 does not make it better in every way. The Su-35 does not have the EO capabilities of the Mig-35 and would need a targetting pod to engage ground targets with its EO system above its nose it is in the wrong place for ground targets.

The plane was not only bigger but better produced also in parts and manufacturing quality. compare AL-31 with smokey short life RD-33 from 80s? Every thing inside Su-35 surpasses MIG-35 that include IRST. and u can always order French targetting pod just like Ruaf and RMAF has done with Su-MKM.

There is just as much room for growth in the RD-33 as there is in the Al-31.

There is no money to invest in RD-33 to bring it upto AL-31 level.

You make it sound like the RD-33 has been standing still and has not been improved too.

Certainly not produced in numbers and improvements to level of Saturn/Salyut.

Which made it cheaper to make than a more indepth change like the Su-34.

Su-34 has its own role to play thats why the program continued for 15 years. There is no such thing with MIG-29 and Ruaf.

But you said UAVs need fighter escort... so fighters are burning gas and the UAVs they are protecting are burning gas. Why not just send the fighters with a targeting pod to do the job of looking for the enemy? If you have airsuperiority then a plane like a Tu-22M3 with some sort of optics surveillance package in its bomb bay would make much more sense it could loiter for hours and run away if needed. Or an Il-76 AWACs model with added EO sensors in pods under the wings. Powerful radar and jammer and EO capability all in one... or M-17 Myasechev (spelling).

u can buy and maintain much greater number of UAV to maintain 24hr observation over the battlefied. But u need just few fighters in vicinity to protect them from fighters coming after them. Fighters have low loiter time and can only be dispatched in emergency. they dont have to stay 24hrs with UAV. only when radar detects a threat coming after them. AWACS is even more expensive to put every where.

The quality of optics you can put in what is a disposable aircraft like a UAV is limited. A proper manned aircraft could have much better optics and fly much higher than a UAV... except for the really big UAVs but they cost a small fortune.

Not on future UAVs. that will be comparable to fighters in sensors but not in speed, weopon load, high-g maneovering etc. UAV is still cheaper than 4.5 to 5th generation fighters.

If the fighter is better than yours... ie it was a Russian UAV and the Mig-29 was a Russian plane escorting it into Georgian territory and the Georgians only have the Su-25 to intercept, then they would have to use SAMs or simply smoke on the ground to hide targets they don't want to be seen.

Good UAV can maintain long time coverage over the area and u cannot put smoke for days. Its good observatonal equipment. Only long range SAMs can reach expensive UAV altitudes with there small rcs.

Most radar guided missiles can operate in home on jam modes. Most Russian radar guided SAMs have a TV guided backup mode too. With an autotracker it can be easily effective at high altitudes.

Only S-300 class missile.

How many countries have such weapons. And when was the last time such a weapon was used anywhere near its max range?
Any Russian fighter shot down near its border while trying to intercept a UAV of any nationality over Russian territory could be considered an act of war... exactly which country would risk that?

ur assuming too much that Russia builts only weopons for defence. It is capitalist country and it has interests far away from borders.

No, in Russia there are really only 2-3 companies that could manage a 5th gen fighter... Mig, Sukhoi, and possibly Yakovlev with their Yak-43.
But you want them to have only one... Sukhoi.

Yak/MIG can only draw 5th generation fighter on Paper.

Of course you can... some of the best ground radars the Russians have at the moment are part of the S-300V and S-400 SAM systems. In some terms they are directly comparable to AEGIS radars.

And when they get around to building 6 carriers they will need AEGIS class like cruisers to support such carrier groups.

We are only discussing near future untill 2015 at most. One Those Six carriers only PAK-FA derivative will land. nothing to do with MIG.

Only you say the Mig-29 are not. Show me some reports declaring the Russian AF will get rid of all its Mig-29s in service and in storage and I will start believing what you say.

Show me report that Ruaf has given large order for MIG-29SMT just like Su-27SM?. u have to assume that they are not putting new engines on MIG-29 they will retire with time.

The Mig-21 is actually easy and cheap to operate and maintain. That is why there are a few privately owned Mig-21s. You will never see a privately owned Mig-29 or Su-27 because they are just too expensive to justify.

MIG-29/Su-27 takes alot of fuel and expensive parts and skill personal to maintain but they fly longer than MIG-21 after maintainance.

Su-24 upgrades continue till there are sufficient Su-34s to replace them. Just as I would suggest the Mig-29 and Su-27 will be upgraded and used for the decade or more it will take to get the PAK-FA into service.

But MIG-29 upgrades are not continuing just like Su-24/Su-27SM? show me single report of upgraded MIG-29 entering Ruaf?

There was nothing at all wrong with the Mig-29SMTs delivered to Algeria. Algeria just assumed they were getting new aircraft. The returned aircraft were tested and found to be perfectly fine.

Do u think Algerians are stupid that nothing wrong with MIG-29?

Just flying normal patrols without accelerating to high speed at low level, or pulling high gs is the bread and butter of any fighter aircraft... it should extend the life of the fighter rather than shorten it. The fact that the Mig-29 has only operated as a patrol aircraft around Russia in rather harsher weather extremes than in northern Iraq (when was the last time it was -40 degrees at sea level in Iraq?) suggests there are plenty more flight hours left in the Russian aircraft... unlike the US aircraft, whose wings are falling off.

US aircraft hours are far higher than any other airforce in the wrold by wide magnitude. there is not even a comparsion.

The Su-35 might have faster acceleration but that will just burn more fuel. The point of an interceptor is to intercept. If you try to reduce the number of bases and lengthen the distance the interceptor has to fly then you increase the size of gaps in your defences for enemy to exploit.

The point is Su-35 can do its intended role much better than MIG-29. Su-35 is fast, longer life engines, longer range sensors, longer range weopons, higher altitude, more weopons etc.

Needless to say the Su-27 and Mig-29 have the same top speed but if you make the comparison with missiles, an SA-17 might only reach out to 50km range while an S-400 might reach to 400km. You don't deploy SA-17s 50km apart... they need an overlap so if you put them 40km apart that gives you better coverage. If you think you can replace those SA-17s with S-400s by putting them 300km apart then you have to keep in mind that if both missiles travelled at the same speed that a target flying directly between two S-400 sites will be 300km from either set of missiles. By the time the missile has travelled out 300km that target might be well past the danger area and at the edge of the engagement zone... especially if it is supercruising.
With the on paper less capable SA-17s the distance to the target is shorter but the distance to the next airbase is also shorter too so the target, unless they are an SR-71 is not going to be as far through the airspace when the interceptor arrives. Equally an SA-17 can be based much closer to the border without creating problems than the S-400 can.

MIG-29 and Su-35 does not have the same top speed. Su-35 is tested with weopons and can reach Mach 2.25 at 36000 feet. MIG-35 will barely rech Mach 2 in clean configuration.

Why do you think the Su-27BM will carry a longer range missile than a Mig-29SMT could carry? Remember the longest range AAM in service in the RuAF is on a Mig, not a Sukhoi.

that is MIG-31 not MIG-29 and it is going to change with Su-35/PAK-FA.

Because the RD-33 is intended for a lighter fighter than the PAK-FA is going to be. Just as the makers of the AL-31 talk about increasing thrust by several tons per engine the makers of the RD-33 talk about future 10 ton and 12 ton thrust models.

They can talk all they want. It is the Salyut/Saturn that will reach with better funding, better and larger quantity production.

But the Mig-29SMT is one of those post Soviet designs that is less maintainence intensive like the Su-27SM

SMT is not even accepted by Ruaf and Su-27SM will already reach two regiments by this year.

Because there are other users of the engine including currently the Russian AF. Don't you think that while the Al-31 makers have been working on upgrades that the makers of the RD-33 have been working just as hard on their engine?

RD-33 makers didnot have the same kind of funds lik AL-31 and they are 10 years behind.

Figures I have show 3,400km for Su-35 and 2,100km for Mig-29SMT. Whip out the calculator and that shows 2.765 ratio for the Su-35 and 2.61 for the Mig-29SMT... win to the Mig-29 it seems.

Su-35 is 3600KM with higher powered engein.. MIG-29SMT is 1800KM. but MIG-29SMT is only good for half weopons of SU-35. Su-27SM is for 4000KM (better AL-31FM engines).
http://www.migavia.ru/eng/military_e/MiG_29_SMT_e.htm.
MIG-29SMT with 3 drop tanks will reach 3000KM.

Even powerful radars are not used all the time. Giving your position away like that is bad for your life expectancy.

Everything is not used all the time.

4,000 airframe hours = 40 years of flight. for 15 years of operations they just need 1,500 hours left on the clock... and that is without any overhaul at all... and these aircraft have very few hours on the clock... no northern no fly zone to police etc etc.

MIG-29 has only 2500hrs airframe life. 4000hr will need some serious work.

The Mig-31BM doesn't come into it because it is an interceptor only. It will hardly be used in short range strike missions.

There is no such thing as short range strike missions. Even for Short range strike missions will need Su-25/Su-34 combo depending on target.

[over G]

I have tried to search more about these AESA L-Band modules...any more information about this? , im lazy..and really dont have aviation magazines, so somebody who enlight a bit more about that topic?

[flex297]

Why not? with 1000 Long range Stealth Fighters u can directly sent Saudi/pak airforces to stone age along with complete destrcution of there economic infrastructure. u can enforce no fly zone both over the sea and land at much greater ranges against any opponent.
u have to esclated conflict to such level that no one comes to the aid of the opponents and that what Russia is trying to achieve. They arent interested in short range abiltiy with limited range weopons, small self protection suites/sensors. and i doubt they are going settle for anything less when u have all the money and natural resources to accomplish.

OK, you wipe out RSAF.. So what? How does that help to gain control over resources.

You wiped out Afghan AF, too and you still lost the war..

[star49]

OK, you wipe out RSAF.. So what? How does that help to gain control over resources.

u dont get control of resource but u prevent others from using resources against you. Get real. Russia real aim is to get world reserve currency status and to force liquidation on Asian foreign reserves. thats why they started all that StPete exchange. Let EU/Georgia compete with Russia on Market Prices when old Soviet infrastructure is there.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080602/109089984.html
Gazprom proposes buying Azerbaijani gas at market prices

You wiped out Afghan AF, too and you still lost the war..

Russians clearly won Afghan war. It discredited Afghan islamic resistence in eyes of Central Asian Muslims and the end the rest of the world (look what NATO is doing. It is spending a decade cleaning its own mess). Russia have still bases in Central Asian countries but Binladen has none.201 Motorized division is rapidly modernized in tajikistan.

[over G]

I sense a flamewar nearby....

So is this the final result of lack of news?, gas price, wall texts, and a disturbing feeling ao an holocaustic posting

May the flame be with u...

[Twisted]

LOL. You guys are hilarious.
If there's nothing new on the PAK-FA, then please don't bother to post.

[1MAN]

Show me report that Ruaf has given large order for MIG-29SMT just like Su-27SM?. u have to assume that they are not putting new engines on MIG-29 they will retire with time.

The first batch of 10 to 15 MiG-29SMTs was delivered before the end of the year. In 1999, a total of 20 to 30 MiG-29 fighters were modernized into the MiG-29SMT version, approaching fifth-generation fighters in terms of characteristics.
http://www.globalsecurity.org/milita.../mig-29smt.htm

[GarryB]

Why not. Everywar does not need nuclear weopons. Stealth fighters have alot Sustain speed (supercrusie with low fuel consumption) and can do surgical strikes.

Russia doesn't need surgical strikes. It needs sufficient numbers of fighters to get to points along its border to defend its airspace.

That only with US. With smaller nations it will be using stealth fighters.

With NATO the reply will be nukes... that includes most of Russias European area except the 'stans. Which hardly require stealth fighters.

With smaller nations stealth fighters are not necessary.

Soviet built fighters does not have 20 years life without airframe and engine upgrades.

The Mig-29s currently in service weren't made in the 90s. It makes no sense to continue to operate aircraft that haven't had an upgrade in 15 years. Especially when upgrades are cheaper than building new aircraft.

I can assume new built Su-35BM will take the role even from MIG-31 as it has supercruise, long range sensors, better range etc.

Except it wont be in service till 2010 and the Mig-31s are getting upgraded now. No point in upgrading the Mig-31s so that they can be retired. The Mig-31s can carry R-37Ms... something the Su-35s can't do.

Soviet methods depends on large conscript personal which may not be available so only centeralized maintaince at few places can be done. u cannot spread maintainance personal on hundreds of airbases where aircraft land.

A Mig-29 airbase will have support equipment and personel to operate Mig-29s. In places where there are a lot of bases that are not far away from each other then it makes sense to have Mig-29s there.

When u dont have continuity of management. No bonuses, no Experiance workers left, no foreign country training,no updating of production equipment, no continuity with supplier bases etc.

So Democracy doesn't work... every 3-4 years government can be changed...

so ur upgrading 3 or 4 years to upgrade 200 MIG-29SMT? it isnot gone happen. It will take alteast 5 years to upgrad IAF 60 MIG-29s with already engine agreement in place.

Would suggest that is because it is an Indian upgrade that includes items from foreign countries that needs to be integrated, and is done for minimum profit. For Russian AF it will be all Russian components and an upgrade that has already been tested.

T in SMT also means more MTOW which needs airframe beefup with better engines.

Why better engines? How often will a Mig-29 pull 9gs? With a helmet mounted sight and high off boresight missiles why does it need top manouver capability.

The original idea behind 9g manouver capability was to be able to outmanouver relatively slow tracking missile seekers like the seekers in the Sidewinder. Now that more sophisticated seekers with higher track speeds and of course thrust vectoring such manouvering is for airshows.

Evidence is clear with Chinese export contracts. AL-31FM has similar price as RD-33 series 3.

So the Chinese are prepared to pay a higher price for the RD-33s... but hang on... how many Mig-29s do the Chinese have in service? Work it out.
The extra cost of the RD-33 is because they know they are selling to a country that wants and engine that can be fitted to a non-russian aircraft for sale to third parties. If they were supporting a Chinese purchase of Russian aircraft then they might drop the price, but selling the Chinese a component of a Chinese aircraft they will sell for profit you recognise they need your engine so you charge as much as you think you can get away with.

{quote]MotorSch make alll the engines for Klimov helis. and it will take time to bring production back.[/quote]

Klimov don't make Helos, just engines. What about the TV7-117V series of new generation helo engines at the Omsk based Baranov Motorbuilding Production Association and Chernyshev Moscow Machine Building Enterprise JSC?

Factory managers all that matters.

Then the Russian aviation industry is dead. All we can hope from them now is upgrades of existing types.

PAK-FA will be the last man fighter in Russia.

Yeah... the British claimed the end of the manned fighter aircraft more than 40 years ago... SAMs will do it all. Where are the British SAMs now?

Those design bureaus have nothing to offer to Sukhoi.

Sukhoi is not a factory either... it is as dead as MiG.

If Russia has to successful it will follow American way.

What American way? Spend 1.2 billion on every new bomber they make so they are ready for a war that will never come and make them further unable to fight the wars they are involved in right now?

Raw materials country with strong military industrial complex will always have the upper hand on consumer societies like China/Japan.

And when the raw materials run out... or made obsolete?

so do u think Su-35/Su-34/MIG-29 has the same range with on one inflight refuelling?

No, but if you can refuel once then refuelling twice is not a big concern... even if it was necessary.

The plane was not only bigger but better produced also in parts and manufacturing quality.

It is a tool of war, not a fashion parade bimbo.

I guess the T-34 was crap... some of them weren't even painted!!!

compare AL-31 with smokey short life RD-33 from 80s?

The original Al-31 didn't have a huge lifespan either.

and u can always order French targetting pod just like Ruaf and RMAF has done with Su-MKM.

The Russian AF has a policy of using foreign components only where they are clearly superior to the available local product. The company that makes the EO component in the Mig-35 also created and made a laser communication system currently used in Americas GPS satellites and many other satellites.

There is no money to invest in RD-33 to bring it upto AL-31 level.

It doesn't need to be at AL-31 level... what ever that is.

Certainly not produced in numbers and improvements to level of Saturn/Salyut.

So the T-54 series tank must be the best in the world... it has been made in the greatest numbers.

Su-34 has its own role to play thats why the program continued for 15 years.

The program continued for so long for two reasons... firstly the Su-24 was doing the job so a replacement was not actually needed. Second for most of those 15 years there was no money to put it into service anyway.

There is no such thing with MIG-29 and Ruaf.

The Russian AF wasn't interested in upgrading the Mig-29 because it already did the job they wanted it for. An SMT upgrade would be nice, but they had no money for lots of new guided air to ground missiles. The only improvement that would have brought would be a wider range of AAMs for some of the aircraft in service. For most, they could already use the R-27T and R-27ET and R-27ER so the SMT upgrade would just add the R-77 to the AAM inventory and they hadn't accepted the R-77 into service so what was the point?

u can buy and maintain much greater number of UAV to maintain 24hr observation over the battlefied.

Over a real battlefield such targets will be engaged and probably destroyed in numbers. Unless the enemy is like the Taleban in which case they could certainly use some long range high flying UAVs... except the Russians don't currently have any. But that really means nothing because Interceptors like Mig-29s are not recon aircraft in the first place.

Not on future UAVs. that will be comparable to fighters in sensors but not in speed, weopon load, high-g maneovering etc. UAV is still cheaper than 4.5 to 5th generation fighters.

And much easier to deal with. 90% of the cost of a modern fighter is sensors and self defence suite. Put those on a UAV and you make a UAV you can't afford to lose.

Only long range SAMs can reach expensive UAV altitudes with there small rcs.

An SA-2 with optical backup.

Only S-300 class missile.

And SA-2, SA-3, SA-5... HAWK etc. Plus improvised missiles. Serbian experiments with a large booster rocket fitted to R-60MK and R-73 missiles are very interesting in that respect... with a big enough booster...

ur assuming too much that Russia builts only weopons for defence. It is capitalist country and it has interests far away from borders.

For the next 20-30 years it is not going to benefit Russia to be bombing countries like the west currently is. Right now it needs to set up a solid base for itself before it starts taking on commitments elsewhere.

Yak/MIG can only draw 5th generation fighter on Paper.

The Mig-1.44/1.42 was not paper. Apart from the US no other country in the world has even gotten that far.

We are only discussing near future untill 2015 at most. One Those Six carriers only PAK-FA derivative will land. nothing to do with MIG.

They are going to be small carriers in the 20-30,000 ton class... there is no way they will carry Flanker or PAK-FA sized aircraft, and carry the projected number they want on board.

Show me report that Ruaf has given large order for MIG-29SMT just like Su-27SM?. u have to assume that they are not putting new engines on MIG-29 they will retire with time.

I just bought the few month old issues of AFM, Air Int, and Combat Arms and they have articles about the Russian military and both talk about the future of the Mig-29. They mention the incorporation of Mig into another company and talk about Mig-35 based upgrades and Su-35 upgrades tiding the Russian AF over till the entry into service of the PAK-FA and beyond.
They also talk about the procedure to enter Russian AF service as being a three stage thing and that the Mig-31BM upgrade entering its third stage.

MIG-29/Su-27 takes alot of fuel and expensive parts and skill personal to maintain but they fly longer than MIG-21 after maintainance.

The Mig-21 is simpler and cheaper to maintain and operate. It lacks the capability of the Mig-29 and Su-27, but that is totally understandable.

But MIG-29 upgrades are not continuing just like Su-24/Su-27SM? show me single report of upgraded MIG-29 entering Ruaf?

The 14 Mig-29SMT aircraft Algeria has rejected are likely to go to the Russian AF.

Do u think Algerians are stupid that nothing wrong with MIG-29?

In Air Int and AFM the Algerians admitted that the decision to return the Mig-29SMTs was internal politics and pressure from an external rival (which remained undisclosed). In Combat Arms, Tom Cooper claims it was inferior workmanship or some such rubbish, but then Tom has always hated the 29.

US aircraft hours are far higher than any other airforce in the wrold by wide magnitude. there is not even a comparsion.

Which shows that if they are going to continue to use existing fighters with upgrades along with 189 F-22s there must be a reason for it. It can't be because they are conservative and don't like to throw stuff away, because quite clearly they do throw stuff away... perhaps it is because 5th generation fighters are so incredibly expensive and not clearly completely necessary that they don't want to invest in trillions of dollars worth of them just at the moment.

The point is Su-35 can do its intended role much better than MIG-29. Su-35 is fast, longer life engines, longer range sensors, longer range weopons, higher altitude, more weopons etc.

Why not compare the Su-35 to an F-16A and say the Su-35 is superior to that as well? The Mig-29 is also fast and the life span of the engines is not important as long as they do their job. Long range sensors is irrelevant in a GCI intercept environment as the interceptor will have its radar not transmitting for most of the intercept anyway. Which exactly longer range weapons are you talking about? Current in service weapons for interceptors are the R-27 series... which are both used by both aircraft. High altitude might be nice for a spy plane, but for an interceptor it has more interest in getting to point x as quickly as possible... not time for sunbathing.
More weapons would be important if more weapons were needed. If the Mig-29 hasn't hit a target with 2 R-27s and 4 R-73s and 150 cannon shells then having 4 more missiles is not going to mean much.

MIG-29 and Su-35 does not have the same top speed. Su-35 is tested with weopons and can reach Mach 2.25 at 36000 feet. MIG-35 will barely rech Mach 2 in clean configuration.

Mig-29s top speed is Mach 2.35. Interceptors have no business at 36000 ft except against Boeings.

They can talk all they want. It is the Salyut/Saturn that will reach with better funding, better and larger quantity production.

Until they produce a smaller engine suitable for a Mig-29 size aircraft their level of technology or production mean nothing.

MIG-29 has only 2500hrs airframe life. 4000hr will need some serious work.

Duh, which makes it ideal... the Russian AF wont want Mig-29s or Su-27s in service in 40 years time... they are interim fighters till the PAK-FA is in service. They will then probably decide if they want only the PAK-FA or if they might want a smaller 5th gen fighter to compliment the PAK-FA in service... and also if a pure interceptor is necessary to replace the Mig-31 or if the PAK-FA could do that job too. Personally a nice swing wing Tu-22M3 sized super cruiseing bomber/interceptor would be nice along the lines of Sukhois S-60. Mach 1.7 supercruise with rotary internal weapons bays for 40 500kg bombs or 40 400km range AAMs with a huge AESA radar in the nose...

There is no such thing as short range strike missions. Even for Short range strike missions will need Su-25/Su-34 combo depending on target.

Most of the targets that need attacking the most are in the enemies immediate rear, very close to the front lines. Su-25s support combat, they are not really strike aircraft, though that was where the Su-25TM was heading. I am talking about the targets the Mig-27s would have hit like forward airfields, HQs, forward assembly areas for troops and armour, supply columns etc etc.

ya, indeed a lot of cash.

here some Good read about Russia.

You will also notice that the New Russian president visited first Kazakstan and then China. India might be looking to Russia but Russia is also looking south and east more now. It is perhaps sick of getting told how undemocratic it is and told of its poor human rights record...

If there's nothing new on the PAK-FA, then please don't bother to post.

The interim aircraft debate is worth it I think. If the Russian AF clearly only wants the best and have nothing to do with anything that is not the best then at least half the military industrial complex of Russia will fail. It is only a matter of time before Colt start making the next Russian assault rifle.

It will also help us guess what the PAK-FA will be used for. If Star is right then the US ABm system in Europe will be critical, simply because a large powerful radar looking directly into Russian airspace will give them excellent radar data on Russias new stealth fighter before it even enters service. Deploying the PAK-FA and Su-27BM to every Russian Air base will mean the radar aspects of the design will be compromised almost straight away.

[over G]

About the pak-fa engine , there isnt the posibility of a resurrection of the r-79 as a core for the new engine?, that powerplant seemed to be the best choice for the plane , was it abandoned?, the engine had a dry thrust of 10.5 tons and with afterburned (reheated ) of 15.5 tons (compared with the 16 tons of the f-119 isnt bad), also it seems it gave a good range/performance

Any good link about the r-79?

[GarryB]

Actually in Russia's Arms 2004 there is an entry for the R179-300 afterburning bypass turboject engine.
The entry describes two types, the R179M-300 with a thrust reverser, and the R179MV-300 which is vectorable to give vertical lift. Takeoff lift in vertical mode is given as 19,800kgf and takeoff thrust (which I read as horizontal thrust max power short period boosted like with the Mig-21) 21,000kgf.

Other figures are given as SPFC: 1.87 kg/kgf.h (in takeoff power rating).

Max diameter: 1,400mm
Length (less supersonic nozzle section) : 5,340mm
nozzle inclusive : 7,040mm
Dry weight : 2,200kg.

Dry thrust is not mentioned.

[star49]

Russia doesn't need surgical strikes. It needs sufficient numbers of fighters to get to points along its border to defend its airspace.

Russia does not need Surgical strikes? from where this assumption comes from.

With NATO the reply will be nukes... that includes most of Russias European area except the 'stans. Which hardly require stealth fighters.

With smaller nations stealth fighters are not necessary.

only few countries in NATO has Nukes and they are not going to sacrifice themsevlves for smaller countres.

The Mig-29s currently in service weren't made in the 90s. It makes no sense to continue to operate aircraft that haven't had an upgrade in 15 years. Especially when upgrades are cheaper than building new aircraft.

??

Except it wont be in service till 2010 and the Mig-31s are getting upgraded now. No point in upgrading the Mig-31s so that they can be retired. The Mig-31s can carry R-37Ms... something the Su-35s can't do.

Ultra long range BVR is part of Su-35 of weopons. It is right there on Knaapo website.

A Mig-29 airbase will have support equipment and personel to operate Mig-29s. In places where there are a lot of bases that are not far away from each other then it makes sense to have Mig-29s there.

Alot of bases needs closing with personal retired.

So Democracy doesn't work... every 3-4 years government can be changed...

Democracy works but first country has to be reach for efficient functioning. Starving people cannot make right decisions.

Would suggest that is because it is an Indian upgrade that includes items from foreign countries that needs to be integrated, and is done for minimum profit. For Russian AF it will be all Russian components and an upgrade that has already been tested.

But still u need new engines, Radar, glass cockpit, airframe extension at miniumum. and u cant put MIG-35 engine into old aircraft so the end result is still inferior to new aircraft.

Why better engines? How often will a Mig-29 pull 9gs? With a helmet mounted sight and high off boresight missiles why does it need top manouver capability.

The original idea behind 9g manouver capability was to be able to outmanouver relatively slow tracking missile seekers like the seekers in the Sidewinder. Now that more sophisticated seekers with higher track speeds and of course thrust vectoring such manouvering is for airshows.

Those engines are practically done and it is more than likely there maintaince personal are either retired or left for other jobs.

So the Chinese are prepared to pay a higher price for the RD-33s... but hang on... how many Mig-29s do the Chinese have in service? Work it out.
The extra cost of the RD-33 is because they know they are selling to a country that wants and engine that can be fitted to a non-russian aircraft for sale to third parties. If they were supporting a Chinese purchase of Russian aircraft then they might drop the price, but selling the Chinese a component of a Chinese aircraft they will sell for profit you recognise they need your engine so you charge as much as you think you can get away with.

Than why J-10 engines are same price as FC-1? Chinese can even export J-10 at certain point. It has nothing to with aircraft but production behind engine.

MotorSch make alll the engines for Klimov helis. and it will take time to bring production back.

Klimov don't make Helos, just engines. What about the TV7-117V series of new generation helo engines at the Omsk based Baranov Motorbuilding Production Association and Chernyshev Moscow Machine Building Enterprise JSC?

so who design VK-2500/VK-800 etc?

Then the Russian aviation industry is dead. All we can hope from them now is upgrades of existing types.

Communist era industry is completely dead. ,

Yeah... the British claimed the end of the manned fighter aircraft more than 40 years ago... SAMs will do it all. Where are the British SAMs now?

British can always piggy pag US. No need for them to maintian a arms Industry.

Sukhoi is not a factory either... it is as dead as MiG.

But Sukhoi people runs factory and can always subcontract work to Sukhoi for design.

What American way? Spend 1.2 billion on every new bomber they make so they are ready for a war that will never come and make them further unable to fight the wars they are involved in right now?

It is there economic system that make things expensive. it has nothing to do with end product.

And when the raw materials run out... or made obsolete?

when Raw materials run out world will stop producing.

No, but if you can refuel once then refuelling twice is not a big concern... even if it was necessary.

Refuelling twice will put tankers in harms way of long range missile of enemy. u want to refuel far away from battlefield.

It is a tool of war, not a fashion parade bimbo.

I guess the T-34 was crap... some of them weren't even painted!!!

Time has moved on.

The original Al-31 didn't have a huge lifespan either.

Still much better than RD-33.

The Russian AF has a policy of using foreign components only where they are clearly superior to the available local product. The company that makes the EO component in the Mig-35 also created and made a laser communication system currently used in Americas GPS satellites and many other satellites.

MIG-35 is as expensive as Su-35. so whats the point even considering it.

So the T-54 series tank must be the best in the world... it has been made in the greatest numbers.

Past has no revlance to future.

The program continued for so long for two reasons... firstly the Su-24 was doing the job so a replacement was not actually needed. Second for most of those 15 years there was no money to put it into service anyway.

thats the reason of existence. It has role to play.

The Russian AF wasn't interested in upgrading the Mig-29 because it already did the job they wanted it for. An SMT upgrade would be nice, but they had no money for lots of new guided air to ground missiles. The only improvement that would have brought would be a wider range of AAMs for some of the aircraft in service. For most, they could already use the R-27T and R-27ET and R-27ER so the SMT upgrade would just add the R-77 to the AAM inventory and they hadn't accepted the R-77 into service so what was the point?

Except Ruaf will be introducing new BVR missile with Su-27SM/Su-35 and PAK-FA. So no point in going with integration with old MIG-29.

Over a real battlefield such targets will be engaged and probably destroyed in numbers. Unless the enemy is like the Taleban in which case they could certainly use some long range high flying UAVs... except the Russians don't currently have any. But that really means nothing because Interceptors like Mig-29s are not recon aircraft in the first place.

The flow of money will go towards system what is needed not necessary maintaining current sytem which have no role. UAV certainly has role.

And much easier to deal with. 90% of the cost of a modern fighter is sensors and self defence suite. Put those on a UAV and you make a UAV you can't afford to lose.

90% of cost of fighters in engines and raw material that are so expensive. electronic components are getting cheaper when u have modern Fabs to build them. UAVs are mostly made from composites.

For the next 20-30 years it is not going to benefit Russia to be bombing countries like the west currently is. Right now it needs to set up a solid base for itself before it starts taking on commitments elsewhere.

Russia needs very high prices of natural resources so if West/Asia got those resources cheaply from those countries it is not in russisa interest. So Russian Mining companies have to be backed up by credible force.

The Mig-1.44/1.42 was not paper. Apart from the US no other country in the world has even gotten that far.

Those doesnot satisfy 21st century requirement.

They are going to be small carriers in the 20-30,000 ton class... there is no way they will carry Flanker or PAK-FA sized aircraft, and carry the projected number they want on board.

It hasnt been decided. and It will be PAK-FA derivative.

I just bought the few month old issues of AFM, Air Int, and Combat Arms and they have articles about the Russian military and both talk about the future of the Mig-29. They mention the incorporation of Mig into another company and talk about Mig-35 based upgrades and Su-35 upgrades tiding the Russian AF over till the entry into service of the PAK-FA and beyond.
They also talk about the procedure to enter Russian AF service as being a three stage thing and that the Mig-31BM upgrade entering its third stage.

It is just talk. the fact that there are three prototypes for Su-35 in one year but no prototype for actual MIG-35 will tell you some thing. They cannot wait for actuall MIG-35 to be flown in 2010 and inducted in 2012. that is India schedule.

The 14 Mig-29SMT aircraft Algeria has rejected are likely to go to the Russian AF.

They have nowhere else to go as there is $250m involved that will get back to Irkut for Flankers.

In Air Int and AFM the Algerians admitted that the decision to return the Mig-29SMTs was internal politics and pressure from an external rival (which remained undisclosed). In Combat Arms, Tom Cooper claims it was inferior workmanship or some such rubbish, but then Tom has always hated the 29.

what ever they say. It does not change the fact they could have increase the MIG-29SMT order and cancelled Flanker.

Which shows that if they are going to continue to use existing fighters with upgrades along with 189 F-22s there must be a reason for it. It can't be because they are conservative and don't like to throw stuff away, because quite clearly they do throw stuff away... perhaps it is because 5th generation fighters are so incredibly expensive and not clearly completely necessary that they don't want to invest in trillions of dollars worth of them just at the moment.

What USAF does is not example for Ruaf. Ruaf have too many strong countries near its borders like China/Japan and Europe is not far way.

Why not compare the Su-35 to an F-16A and say the Su-35 is superior to that as well? The Mig-29 is also fast and the life span of the engines is not important as long as they do their job. Long range sensors is irrelevant in a GCI intercept environment as the interceptor will have its radar not transmitting for most of the intercept anyway. Which exactly longer range weapons are you talking about? Current in service weapons for interceptors are the R-27 series... which are both used by both aircraft. High altitude might be nice for a spy plane, but for an interceptor it has more interest in getting to point x as quickly as possible... not time for sunbathing.
More weapons would be important if more weapons were needed. If the Mig-29 hasn't hit a target with 2 R-27s and 4 R-73s and 150 cannon shells then having 4 more missiles is not going to mean much.

do job is not enough reason for maintaining some thing which is going to drain Industrial capacity down the road. Every thing has to take into consideration Industrial capacity along with functionality. And Russia is no spending money on current in service weopons.

Mig-29s top speed is Mach 2.35. Interceptors have no business at 36000 ft except against Boeings.

Nope. only MIG-35 with new engines can go that fast with weopons. The rest are just paper specification.

Duh, which makes it ideal... the Russian AF wont want Mig-29s or Su-27s in service in 40 years time... they are interim fighters till the PAK-FA is in service. They will then probably decide if they want only the PAK-FA or if they might want a smaller 5th gen fighter to compliment the PAK-FA in service... and also if a pure interceptor is necessary to replace the Mig-31 or if the PAK-FA could do that job too. Personally a nice swing wing Tu-22M3 sized super cruiseing bomber/interceptor would be nice along the lines of Sukhois S-60. Mach 1.7 supercruise with rotary internal weapons bays for 40 500kg bombs or 40 400km range AAMs with a huge AESA radar in the nose...

There is continous production of Su-34 that has engine commanlity with other Flankers . smaller 5th generation does not make sense. and they are desigining a new bomber.

Most of the targets that need attacking the most are in the enemies immediate rear, very close to the front lines. Su-25s support combat, they are not really strike aircraft, though that was where the Su-25TM was heading. I am talking about the targets the Mig-27s would have hit like forward airfields, HQs, forward assembly areas for troops and armour, supply columns etc etc.

Su-34 can to that with much less passes than Su-25/MIG-27.

You will also notice that the New Russian president visited first Kazakstan and then China. India might be looking to Russia but Russia is also looking south and east more now. It is perhaps sick of getting told how undemocratic it is and told of its poor human rights record...

It has more to do with economics. But Putin drives Mercedes and lada brand has been sold to French. So it means they are not interested in continuing communist era products.

The interim aircraft debate is worth it I think. If the Russian AF clearly only wants the best and have nothing to do with anything that is not the best then at least half the military industrial complex of Russia will fail. It is only a matter of time before Colt start making the next Russian assault rifle.

That industrail base of previous era is already a failure as u cannot raise wages of workers who makes inferior products and if wages are not increased they will leave for private sector. so only the most expensive products will survive.

It will also help us guess what the PAK-FA will be used for. If Star is right then the US ABm system in Europe will be critical, simply because a large powerful radar looking directly into Russian airspace will give them excellent radar data on Russias new stealth fighter before it even enters service. Deploying the PAK-FA and Su-27BM to every Russian Air base will mean the radar aspects of the design will be compromised almost straight away.

ABM system is still few years away and looking into steath fighter does not make aircraft less stealthy. peace time and war time stealth is different.

[over G]

Actually in Russia's Arms 2004 there is an entry for the R179-300 afterburning bypass turboject engine.
The entry describes two types, the R179M-300 with a thrust reverser, and the R179MV-300 which is vectorable to give vertical lift. Takeoff lift in vertical mode is given as 19,800kgf and takeoff thrust (which I read as horizontal thrust max power short period boosted like with the Mig-21) 21,000kgf.

Other figures are given as SPFC: 1.87 kg/kgf.h (in takeoff power rating).

Max diameter: 1,400mm
Length (less supersonic nozzle section) : 5,340mm
nozzle inclusive : 7,040mm
Dry weight : 2,200kg.

Dry thrust is not mentioned.

1.4 mts diameter..that is a big fan....dont know if could fit well on a fighter (double engined)...althought it thrust and dimensions could be reduced for a requirement to 18-17 tons, which i think si more than enough for that plane (really...more than enough), hope the pak fa will be compatible with less powered engines, that stuff must to be sold...

[GarryB]

Russia does not need Surgical strikes? from where this assumption comes from.

If Russia needs to attack targets outside Russia then the Su-24M2, Su-34 or Tu-22M3 are what you would use. Not an interceptor.

only few countries in NATO has Nukes and they are not going to sacrifice themsevlves for smaller countres.

It is a collective defence agreement. They are bound to support each other in the case of an attack. Turkey didn't support the US in its invasion of Iraq simply because Iraq never attacked the US.

Ultra long range BVR is part of Su-35 of weopons. It is right there on Knaapo website.

The Su-35 is not operational. It will be integrated into the Su-35. It will probably also be integrated into the Mig-35 as well. The point is that currently it is integrated and operational on only one aircraft type... the Mig-31BM.

Alot of bases needs closing with personal retired.

Some do. A lot just need to be upgraded. Having too few operational airfields makes planning attacks much easier and defence harder.

Starving people cannot make right decisions.

Starving people tend to make the most sensible decisions... but what has starving people to do with managers and governments? Aren't they opposite sides of the same coin?

But still u need new engines, Radar, glass cockpit, airframe extension at miniumum. and u cant put MIG-35 engine into old aircraft so the end result is still inferior to new aircraft.

Why can't you? Aerodynamics have changed rather less than engines have over the last decade or two.

Those engines are practically done and it is more than likely there maintaince personal are either retired or left for other jobs.

So how did MIG upgrade those aircraft for Algeria, and Serbia, and make those Mig-29Ks for India or agree with India for the upgrade of existing Indian Mig-29s, or offer the Mig-35 for the Indian MRCA competition?

Than why J-10 engines are same price as FC-1? Chinese can even export J-10 at certain point. It has nothing to with aircraft but production behind engine.

If I buy an expensive car and a really cheap car, if I find the top speeds of both cars is similar, as is fuel economy... should I be surprised that the engines are similar and cost the same?

so who design VK-2500/VK-800 etc?

According to Russia's Arms 2004 MotorSich is the manufacturer for the R179-300, VK-21, R-95TM-300, and R125-300 aeroengines.
The R179-300 series is the engine for the Yak-141, the VK-21 is an engine designed for supersonic passenger airliners (11 tons thrust), the R-95TM-300 and the R125-300 are a tiny 360kgf and 380kgf engines weighing 95kgs and 65kgs respectively designed for use with cruise missiles and UAVs.
The Klimov plant is listed as the manufacturer of the VK-2500, and the TV3-117 standard helo engine.

Note the Saturn company makes the 36MT with a dry weight of 71kg and a SFC of 0.71 and thrust of 450kgf compared to the R95TM-300s SFC of 0.82 and the R125-300s SFC of 0.92 all at max power rating.

Seems to me to make MotorSich the weakest link in this case... especially as it is in what is likely to be a NATO country soon enough anyway (they want the Russian Navy out of Sevastopol by 2017... you can't get much clearer than that...)

Communist era industry is completely dead.

Only if they follow your growth path. It seems they are not however.
The Russians can't copy the US's model for military aircraft design because in the US military aircraft makers were complete entities... they were design bureaus and factories all in one. Soviet Design Bureaus worked with factories but the Design Bureaus have the testing facilities and design talent. By joining the design bureaus with the factories and parts suppliers (engine and radar and weapon makers traditionally) you can create viable Soviet aircraft manufacturers comparable with anything in the west. Some of those companies don't compete directly so combining those that don't compete you increase their range of products. For example Beriev is selling a few Be-200 amphibious planes as water bombers and naval patrol aircraft. In the near future they might sell a few A-42 and A-40 albatrosses to the Russian Navy. It is also upgrading the A-50 AWACs aircraft and might even be working on a smaller cheaper model, perhaps for land use, perhaps for the new carriers for the Navy. Yakovlev don't make float planes and nor do they make AWACs aircraft currently. They make jet trainers and also prop trainers. They also have an interesting range of UAV designs. Joining Yakovlev with Beriev will not cost the Russian AF in competition. If Mig and Sukhoi joined they could offer one fighter between them both and the Russian AF will have no competing design to compare it against... unless Tupolev entered something etc.
More to the point with Yakovlev making money by selling Yak-130s to the Russian AF and probably a few exports as well that money can help improve Yaks products and Berievs. When Beriev gets contracts like for AWACS or Naval amphibious planes like a PS-90A powered Albatross replacing the Mail and the May in the short the medium range patrol aircraft. Perhaps a big four engined stretched version to replace the Tu-142 Bear in the long range patrol role. A four engine Amphibious plane wouldn't evoke claims in the west about Russian bombers flying all round the place when they are actually Tu-142 MPAs.
The point is that joining companies together carefully you can strengthen them and give them more reliable income streams without reducing competition within the Military Industrial Complex.

British can always piggy pag US. No need for them to maintian a arms Industry.

And what are Russias options in that regard? Who will sell Russia a 5th gen fighter?

But Sukhoi people runs factory and can always subcontract work to Sukhoi for design.

Have you noticed my spelling of MIG? The aircraft company... the original design Bureau was called MiG. The MIG company today includes factories and other enterprises too.
Now it is part of OAK and OAK don't want to flush all of Migs work down the toilet. They want to sell Mig-35s abroad and to the Russian AF. They also want to continue work on 5th gen fighters for Russian use and for export.

It is there economic system that make things expensive. it has nothing to do with end product.

Their high payed workers are only half the problem. If the Armed Forces of the US didn't want to waste money on things that weren't necessary it wouldn't happen.

when Raw materials run out world will stop producing.

Recycling and reusing is one option. Looking for raw materials in places no one bothered to look before is another.

Refuelling twice will put tankers in harms way of long range missile of enemy. u want to refuel far away from battlefield.

If you can't defend your tankers then how can you defend your AWACs or ground radar stations... or anything?

Tankers in wars are vulnerable. You can reduce the threat but never eliminate it. Flying your tankers over your airspace protected by your SAMs and your fighters is about as good as you can do.

Wanting lots of tankers means needing more interceptors to escort them. A typhoon firing a Meteor at a tanker from long range doesn't require an Su-35 to stop it. A Mig-35 with late model BVR AAMs should be able to lock on to and engage the incoming missile. Sending out Su-27BMs to get rid of those Typhoons or Gripens or Rafales makes sense but not every job requires an Su-27BM... just as every job doesn't require a PAK_FA either, though if that was available and the Su-27BM was available and the Mig-35 was available which fighter types would you send into enemy airspace to take out those enemy fighters and which would you leave to support the tankers?

I'd say having Mig-35s would be rather useful in that case as they can detect and track incoming missiles using EO sensors alone from long range.

Time has moved on.

War isn't won by the army with the shiniest shoes... and never has and never will.

Still much better than RD-33.

Much better than the RD-33 in a Su-27. Not much better than an RD-33 in a Mig-29.

MIG-35 is as expensive as Su-35. so whats the point even considering it.

Based on what figures?

Past has no revlance to future.

Those that ignore the past will repeat the mistakes of the past.

thats the reason of existence. It has role to play.

Of course it does. The Mig-29 also has a role to play... numbers.

Except Ruaf will be introducing new BVR missile with Su-27SM/Su-35 and PAK-FA. So no point in going with integration with old MIG-29.

Fully agree... no point at all... just like there is no point in integrating any new BVR missiles into bog standard old Su-27s either. Only the upgraded aircraft will get the new missiles and weapons... PAK-FA, Su-27SM, Su-27SM2 (BM/35) and Mig-29SMT2 and Mig-35.

The flow of money will go towards system what is needed not necessary maintaining current sytem which have no role. UAV certainly has role.

A UAV has a role but there is no UAV for that role as yet.

90% of cost of fighters in engines and raw material that are so expensive. electronic components are getting cheaper when u have modern Fabs to build them. UAVs are mostly made from composites.

Let me disagree. You reduce an aircraft to its base elements and pile them up by metal and non-metal type and there will not be $60 million dollars worth of material there... I guarantee it.

Russia needs very high prices of natural resources so if West/Asia got those resources cheaply from those countries it is not in russisa interest. So Russian Mining companies have to be backed up by credible force.

Russia is not in a position to try to use force to protect its interest world wide. Won't be in that position for a while yet. Aircraft carriers will however be part of that solution... not getting rid of Mig-29s before their time.

It hasnt been decided. and It will be PAK-FA derivative.

They know how big the shipyard will be... the shipyards for building carriers are not in Russia anymore. They are building a shipyard to make large crude oil carriers and gas tankers. That is the yard they will make their carriers in and they will be nuclear powered and carry approximately 30 aircraft plus helos each.

the fact that there are three prototypes for Su-35 in one year but no prototype for actual MIG-35 will tell you some thing.

One of the articles quite clearly shows a Mig-35 in flight with its EO system on board. In fact go to You Tube and look up Mig-35... in fact do a search on the internet for this filename:
MiG-35-OLS-NIIPP.wmv
It is just over 30MB.

what ever they say. It does not change the fact they could have increase the MIG-29SMT order and cancelled Flanker.

Pressure from an external rival company... when I first read it I assumed it was the French... wanting to sell Rafale... but then if it is external pressure from a rival company and the country gives in and returns one type and asks for Su planes... it is fairly clear who the external pressure was coming from... ...but why? Sukhoi have the Russian AF all sewn up according to you... Su-35s and PAK-FAs are going to replace everything...

What USAF does is not example for Ruaf. Ruaf have too many strong countries near its borders like China/Japan and Europe is not far way.

The reality is that if the USAF can't afford a big expensive 5th gen fighter then the Russian AF probably can't either. Smaller cheaper planes make sense. A mixed force is more affordable and allows you to shift your force where you need it without exposing your bare a$$.

do job is not enough reason for maintaining some thing which is going to drain Industrial capacity down the road.

Drain what industrial capability down the road? Mig claim the SMT upgrade reduces operational costs by 40%. The original Su-27 wasn't cheaper to operate. What makes you think upgraded Su-27s are cheaper to maintain and operate than upgraded Mig-29s?

Nope. only MIG-35 with new engines can go that fast with weopons. The rest are just paper specification.

Fine, they should get Mig-35s then.

There is continous production of Su-34 that has engine commanlity with other Flankers . smaller 5th generation does not make sense. and they are desigining a new bomber.

A single engined 5th gen fighter that is smaller but still stealthy and able to carry more than 4 missiles internally would be perfect for engaging JSF type enemy aircraft.

Su-34 can to that with much less passes than Su-25/MIG-27.

Agree regarding the Mig-27, but the Su-34 has not been in service the last 18 years, when the Mig-27 could have been available for the role.
The Su-25 is a different matter... it is a tactical fighter that is operated by the Russian Army rather than the Russian AF to directly support Russian Army operations.

But Putin drives Mercedes and lada brand has been sold to French. So it means they are not interested in continuing communist era products.

Lada vehicles were mostly based on Fiat. Now Mercedes could be made in Russia... if it isn't already.

That industrail base of previous era is already a failure as u cannot raise wages of workers who makes inferior products and if wages are not increased they will leave for private sector. so only the most expensive products will survive.

To throw everything out would be childish. Improve quality control. Upgrade the manufacturing tools and systems, improve management techniques. A TV that works and can be afforded by most of the population is a rather more important product than the absolute best. The absolute best is obsolete in a month... if you don't sell it within that month then you have to drop your price and you lose money. There is no gain in being on the bleeding edge of technology.

1.4 mts diameter..that is a big fan....dont know if could fit well on a fighter (double engined)

At 21 tons thrust that is a very powerful turbofan... a single engine installation would make sense to me. Without the need for vertical takeoff there is less compromise in the design and a fighter designed around it could be much better than the Yak-141 was going to be. (not that it was going to be bad of course...)

The main problem I can see with the R179-300 is that it seems to be only made in MotorSich in the Ukraine...

[medal64]

Do you have good quality su35BM first flight videos friends?Could you help me?

[over G]

Nice, the thread is cleaned and open, thxs guys

The main problem I can see with the R179-300 is that it seems to be only made in MotorSich in the Ukraine...

But wouldnt be a good idea to integrate Ukraine to the Pakfa?, really now that you have said that, i see brazil/india interest on the plane, but what about the other ex-soviet countries?, what about Poland and other states?, i know the US is arround...but the integration and participation wouldnt ensure a better market?

About Ukraine, well seems they have keeping the research on that engine, and now lyulka is researching (or finish) the al-41. Now, an agreement of r-179'sed pakfas for kiev would'nt help the project?

I know, politics arent my field, but the r179 seems to be too good to be overlooked

BTW Yak is on the pakfa?

[star49]

If Russia needs to attack targets outside Russia then the Su-24M2, Su-34 or Tu-22M3 are what you would use. Not an interceptor.

U need Stealth airplane that is fast the can achieve the maximum element of surprize. and PAK-FA full multirole. u should not automatically assume that just Su-24 is upgraded its systems are at Su-34/PAK-FA level. no one put expensive stuff in old airframe.

It is a collective defence agreement. They are bound to support each other in the case of an attack. Turkey didn't support the US in its invasion of Iraq simply because Iraq never attacked the US.

Again ur assuming too much. Russia has enough economic attraction that prevent any bigger war remote possiblity.

The Su-35 is not operational. It will be integrated into the Su-35. It will probably also be integrated into the Mig-35 as well. The point is that currently it is integrated and operational on only one aircraft type... the Mig-31BM.

It will not be integrated into MIG-35 unless there is export customer. u havent understood the difference between Su-35 and MIG-35 programs. One is new built aircraft and the other is old aircraft with new subsystems.

Some do. A lot just need to be upgraded. Having too few operational airfields makes planning attacks much easier and defence harder.

Few airfields u can provide the required number of personal training, latest airdefence equippment and safety procedures.

Starving people tend to make the most sensible decisions... but what has starving people to do with managers and governments? Aren't they opposite sides of the same coin?

Starving donot make sensible decisions. they based decision based who ever provide direct hands out without thinking too much.. U need very wealth society to make intellectual decsions.

So how did MIG upgrade those aircraft for Algeria, and Serbia, and make those Mig-29Ks for India or agree with India for the upgrade of existing Indian Mig-29s, or offer the Mig-35 for the Indian MRCA competition?

These are pathetic upgrades. The first serious upgrade is IAF MIG-29 but that will take 3 to 4 years for first aircraft to complete. MIG-29K took 4 years but it is not at Sukhoi standards.

If I buy an expensive car and a really cheap car, if I find the top speeds of both cars is similar, as is fuel economy... should I be surprised that the engines are similar and cost the same?

There is other things like weight(safety, comfort) and aerodynamics beside engines for top speed and fuel economy. Aircrafts are alot more complicated.

According to Russia's Arms 2004 MotorSich is the manufacturer for the R179-300, VK-21, R-95TM-300, and R125-300 aeroengines.
The R179-300 series is the engine for the Yak-141, the VK-21 is an engine designed for supersonic passenger airliners (11 tons thrust), the R-95TM-300 and the R125-300 are a tiny 360kgf and 380kgf engines weighing 95kgs and 65kgs respectively designed for use with cruise missiles and UAVs.
The Klimov plant is listed as the manufacturer of the VK-2500, and the TV3-117 standard helo engine.

ur still living in 2004.

Seems to me to make MotorSich the weakest link in this case... especially as it is in what is likely to be a NATO country soon enough anyway (they want the Russian Navy out of Sevastopol by 2017... you can't get much clearer than that...)

Russia will continue to do business with ukraiane whether they join nato or not.
Motorsich is the strongest link. Yak-130 engines are also made with there cooperation.

Only if they follow your growth path. It seems they are not however.
The Russians can't copy the US's model for military aircraft design because in the US military aircraft makers were complete entities... they were design bureaus and factories all in one. Soviet Design Bureaus worked with factories but the Design Bureaus have the testing facilities and design talent. By joining the design bureaus with the factories and parts suppliers (engine and radar and weapon makers traditionally) you can create viable Soviet aircraft manufacturers comparable with anything in the west. Some of those companies don't compete directly so combining those that don't compete you increase their range of products. For example Beriev is selling a few Be-200 amphibious planes as water bombers and naval patrol aircraft. In the near future they might sell a few A-42 and A-40 albatrosses to the Russian Navy. It is also upgrading the A-50 AWACs aircraft and might even be working on a smaller cheaper model, perhaps for land use, perhaps for the new carriers for the Navy. Yakovlev don't make float planes and nor do they make AWACs aircraft currently. They make jet trainers and also prop trainers. They also have an interesting range of UAV designs. Joining Yakovlev with Beriev will not cost the Russian AF in competition. If Mig and Sukhoi joined they could offer one fighter between them both and the Russian AF will have no competing design to compare it against... unless Tupolev entered something etc.
More to the point with Yakovlev making money by selling Yak-130s to the Russian AF and probably a few exports as well that money can help improve Yaks products and Berievs. When Beriev gets contracts like for AWACS or Naval amphibious planes like a PS-90A powered Albatross replacing the Mail and the May in the short the medium range patrol aircraft. Perhaps a big four engined stretched version to replace the Tu-142 Bear in the long range patrol role. A four engine Amphibious plane wouldn't evoke claims in the west about Russian bombers flying all round the place when they are actually Tu-142 MPAs.
The point is that joining companies together carefully you can strengthen them and give them more reliable income streams without reducing competition within the Military Industrial Complex.

Joining companies that have intellectual and industrial capital left to contribute to others. MIG is run by former Irkut managers. how a factory manager is running a design bureau? ever though about that.

And what are Russias options in that regard? Who will sell Russia a 5th gen fighter?

thats why they have too built there own and not waste time and money on old projects.

Have you noticed my spelling of MIG? The aircraft company... the original design Bureau was called MiG. The MIG company today includes factories and other enterprises too.
Now it is part of OAK and OAK don't want to flush all of Migs work down the toilet. They want to sell Mig-35s abroad and to the Russian AF. They also want to continue work on 5th gen fighters for Russian use and for export.

MIG will join this year to OAK and will mostly be relegated to UAV stuff. have u show me any link for MIG-29 upgrades for Ruaf?

Recycling and reusing is one option. Looking for raw materials in places no one bothered to look before is another.

recycling and reusing with raw materials?

If you can't defend your tankers then how can you defend your AWACs or ground radar stations... or anything?

AWACS and tankers are better to be far away from battlefield with Meteor/AIM-120D coming up.

Tankers in wars are vulnerable. You can reduce the threat but never eliminate it. Flying your tankers over your airspace protected by your SAMs and your fighters is about as good as you can do.

U can use tankers over the oceans when there is no threat. SAM coverage ranges are increasing.

Wanting lots of tankers means needing more interceptors to escort them. A typhoon firing a Meteor at a tanker from long range doesn't require an Su-35 to stop it. A Mig-35 with late model BVR AAMs should be able to lock on to and engage the incoming missile. Sending out Su-27BMs to get rid of those Typhoons or Gripens or Rafales makes sense but not every job requires an Su-27BM... just as every job doesn't require a PAK_FA either, though if that was available and the Su-27BM was available and the Mig-35 was available which fighter types would you send into enemy airspace to take out those enemy fighters and which would you leave to support the tankers?

Su-35 has the range, speed, weopons,sensors to detect and intercept typhoon far before it will become threat to Tankers. MIG-35 is not part of Ruaf. Su-35 contributes towards PAK-FA as it is built in same factory but not MIG.

I'd say having Mig-35s would be rather useful in that case as they can detect and track incoming missiles using EO sensors alone from long range.

u can put bigger EO sensors on Su-35. u havent justified why MIG-35 is necessary?

War isn't won by the army with the shiniest shoes... and never has and never will.

War is won by shiniest toys provided it is backed up by proper training and correct political and economic policies.

Those that ignore the past will repeat the mistakes of the past.

Past was a mistake so it is better to learn from West who make the most expensive stuff.

Of course it does. The Mig-29 also has a role to play... numbers.

u can built much more Flankers with same amount of money.

Fully agree... no point at all... just like there is no point in integrating any new BVR missiles into bog standard old Su-27s either. Only the upgraded aircraft will get the new missiles and weapons... PAK-FA, Su-27SM, Su-27SM2 (BM/35) and Mig-29SMT2 and Mig-35.

But MIG-29 isnt upgraded in serious manner nor new built untill this point for Ruaf.

A UAV has a role but there is no UAV for that role as yet.

UAVs/UCAVs roles will be greatly expanded against low threat targets. u dont need fighter.

Let me disagree. You reduce an aircraft to its base elements and pile them up by metal and non-metal type and there will not be $60 million dollars worth of material there... I guarantee it.

For single aircraft but u need alot of energy and labor to convert raw materials in meaningful way.

Russia is not in a position to try to use force to protect its interest world wide. Won't be in that position for a while yet. Aircraft carriers will however be part of that solution... not getting rid of Mig-29s before their time.

Short range MIG-29 with limited sensors is not part of any solution. Aircraft carriers are not part of solution either considering the costs and time to deploy/support.

They know how big the shipyard will be... the shipyards for building carriers are not in Russia anymore. They are building a shipyard to make large crude oil carriers and gas tankers. That is the yard they will make their carriers in and they will be nuclear powered and carry approximately 30 aircraft plus helos each.

u dont build nuclear aircraft carrier for 30 aircraft. considering the cost have sky rocket just recently. I am not even going into steel prices. This whole Naval power theory is going into dustbin. Only Fast moving Stealth bombers, aircraft are the solution. They consume less energy, they are fast to deploy, less personal are required to fly and maintain them, sensors can see further because of height and with Nano technology u dont need big radars or jamming equipment of Battleships either.

One of the articles quite clearly shows a Mig-35 in flight with its EO system on board. In fact go to You Tube and look up Mig-35... in fact do a search on the internet for this filename:
MiG-35-OLS-NIIPP.wmv
It is just over 30MB.

That EO suite can also be put on Su-35. u havent provided any reason why MIG-35 is necessary or has already been ordered?

Pressure from an external rival company... when I first read it I assumed it was the French... wanting to sell Rafale... but then if it is external pressure from a rival company and the country gives in and returns one type and asks for Su planes... it is fairly clear who the external pressure was coming from... ...but why? Sukhoi have the Russian AF all sewn up according to you... Su-35s and PAK-FAs are going to replace everything...

u forget Su-34.

The reality is that if the USAF can't afford a big expensive 5th gen fighter then the Russian AF probably can't either. Smaller cheaper planes make sense. A mixed force is more affordable and allows you to shift your force where you need it without exposing your bare a$$.

The reality is that Russia has smaller population but bigger natural resources with no debt to pay every year from Government budget. so why it cant afford Stealth fighters in greater numbers?

Drain what industrial capability down the road? Mig claim the SMT upgrade reduces operational costs by 40%. The original Su-27 wasn't cheaper to operate. What makes you think upgraded Su-27s are cheaper to maintain and operate than upgraded Mig-29s?

When u order new engines for MIG-29 than cost goes down but Su-27 ranges are already given on website. It is twice of MIG ranges with less than twice of fuel and longer life engines with better payload flexibility and now there is 2500L tanks also so even more flexibility interms of range.

A single engined 5th gen fighter that is smaller but still stealthy and able to carry more than 4 missiles internally would be perfect for engaging JSF type enemy aircraft.

Why u need to create a separate aircraft to engage JSF?. U create one Best aircraft to engage all the threats.

Agree regarding the Mig-27, but the Su-34 has not been in service the last 18 years, when the Mig-27 could have been available for the role.
The Su-25 is a different matter... it is a tactical fighter that is operated by the Russian Army rather than the Russian AF to directly support Russian Army operations.

Maintain MIG-27 would have required money to operate. They just get rid of it.

Lada vehicles were mostly based on Fiat. Now Mercedes could be made in Russia... if it isn't already.

I was giving example of Renault that Russia is ready to cooperete with West so to get Shortest, cheapest route to modernaiztion on its own terms. Russia is not prepared to waste money and time on companies like MIG to bring at par with Sukhoi. This is not going to happen.
This is the highest research level interms of semiconductors with possible transfer to Intel the nanotech.

http://www.eetimes.com/news/semi/sho...leID=208402746
BERLIN — Intel's Craig Barrett has signed an agreement with Rosnanotech, Russia's state nanotechnology organization, for co-development in several areas including sub-45 nanometer ICs.
The agreement was signed at the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum, held June 6 to 8.
The joint research work is in several nanotechnology areas and will include the development of new materials for the production of sub-45nm ICs, according to Rosnanotech. Additionally, Intel and Rosnanotech plan co-research in multiprocessor and multicore systems, as well as in software for modeling nanomaterials. Management training and technology commercialization are also part of the agreement, which also aims to spark Russian startup activity from the research.

To throw everything out would be childish. Improve quality control. Upgrade the manufacturing tools and systems, improve management techniques. A TV that works and can be afforded by most of the population is a rather more important product than the absolute best. The absolute best is obsolete in a month... if you don't sell it within that month then you have to drop your price and you lose money. There is no gain in being on the bleeding edge of technology.

MIG-29 is redundant. money can be spent on newer better products. Absolute best is not obsolete in a month. infact it is very hard financially/Technically to overcome for otherside. We are not talking about consumer goods where there a several players in same industry. 5th generation fighter is monoply over the others.

[GarryB]

But wouldnt be a good idea to integrate Ukraine to the Pakfa?

No. The Ukraine is turning westward... and I don't mean opening up to the west while remaining friends with Russia... I mean turning towards the west and away from Russia.

No real problem there... they can do what they like... but for military purposes it means only the most crucial areas will there be cooperation with the Ukraine.

ie if the An-70 goes ahead then all the components for the Russian model will be built in Russia for example.

If the Ukraine joins NATO it is likely to want F-35s... or all the F-16s freed up by current F-16 users buying F-35s.

really now that you have said that, i see brazil/india interest on the plane, but what about the other ex-soviet countries?

You can basically break them down into two groups. Those that want to westernise and those that see a future with Russia. Ukraine, Georgia and the Baltic countries can't wait to join NATO so they can give the Russians a two finger salute. Belarus, and many of the 'stans have lots of trade with Russia and don't see Russia as the cause of all their problems.
In the Warsaw Pact most eastern European countries see Russia as the cause of all their problems. Russia probably has a better relationship with Germany than with Poland. Its relations with Bulgaria don't seem too bad though.
I would expect most Russian aircraft sales will be internal and to Asia and if a light 5th gen plane can be made at minimal cost perhaps Africa too, but that will likely not come till later when Russia is back to subsidising poorer countries in return for arms sales etc.

Getting the Ukraine on board will not improve market share much. Generally the Ukraine has competed against Russia in the military world market rather than them helping each other in any meaningful way.

About Ukraine, well seems they have keeping the research on that engine, and now lyulka is researching (or finish) the al-41. Now, an agreement of r-179'sed pakfas for kiev would'nt help the project?

It produces a lot of thrust but it is designed for the Yak-141 so top speed is about mach 1.7 or so. The increased width of the engines would probably preclude a weapon bay being fitted. The stealthy projected Yak-43 used a 25 ton thrust class engine and was quite a large aircraft, but I really don't think either were 5th gen engines.

I know, politics arent my field, but the r179 seems to be too good to be overlooked

Would be interesting for a new VSTOL aircraft or perhaps even STOL transport aircraft, but it is like the Harriers engine in that it was designed for a specific purpose.

If it was a Russian engine they might have tried to find a use for it, but why bother with a foreign engine?

BTW Yak is on the pakfa?

As far as I know Sukhoi won the lead, but other companies can subcontract, so Yak might be involved in looking at a VSTOL version. The Russian AF doesn't appear interested in that so unless someone can get them interested or get the Russian Navy to put up some money I doubt much will happen. They might spend a little money to investigate what it might cost and what could be achieved, but I can't see them putting too much time and money into that. They will probably be looking at the VSTOL F-35 program etc though.

U need Stealth airplane that is fast the can achieve the maximum element of surprize. and PAK-FA full multirole. u should not automatically assume that just Su-24 is upgraded its systems are at Su-34/PAK-FA level. no one put expensive stuff in old airframe.

I am talking in terms of current and near future options. Right now there are less than half a dozen Su-34s in the Russian AF and they are fitting out and having manuals written for them. A surgical strike right now would be made by Su-24M2s. A long range strike will be by Tu-22M3s. When the Su-34s are available in numbers and are properly operational they will be the weapon of choice. Later there might be a few sneaky beak missions where secrecy is paramount and a PAK-FA might be used.

Again ur assuming too much. Russia has enough economic attraction that prevent any bigger war remote possiblity.

And an energy war in the future it is not possible that if things turn and change that NATO might think regime change in Russia and seizing Russian resources might be necessary?
A border dispute with Georgia with Georgia as part of NATO might serve as a Gulf of Tonkin incident part III.

One is new built aircraft and the other is old aircraft with new subsystems.

Su-27BM is also being called Su-27SM2.

Few airfields u can provide the required number of personal training, latest airdefence equippment and safety procedures.

Few airfields means fewer targets for the enemies to hit to take out your AF. It also makes mission planning for the enemy because interceptors will be coming from fewer directions... easier to plan for. Equally with fewer airfields they suddenly become very busy with everyone needing to train or perform operations... chaos.

U need very wealth society to make intellectual decsions.

Which is silly. How do you get a wealthy society in the first place without good decisions?

The first serious upgrade is IAF MIG-29 but that will take 3 to 4 years for first aircraft to complete.

What makes you think that? They have about 68 aircraft. If it takes 3-4 years for one then it would take 100 years for all aircraft. You are talking rubbish.

Serbian aircraft were upgraded in less than 3-4 years. They knew what they wanted and paid for it and got it in the timeframe they wanted it.

MIG-29K took 4 years but it is not at Sukhoi standards.

It was scheduled to take that long, and Sukhois standards are irrelevant in this regard.

Aircrafts are alot more complicated.

Indeed they are, which makes it all the harder to say one is better than another based just on a few parameters like flight range, radar size and number of weapons pylons.

Russia will continue to do business with ukraiane whether they join nato or not.

Of course they will, but they are not going to use a Ukrainian component when a Russian component is just as good if not better. Especially if they have to start paying in Euros for things.
The Russians have introduced a lot of Russian kit to replace items formerly from other Soviet Republics. Some of the kit is even joint developed with western firms... if they are going to pay Euros and deal with a foreign country for parts or weapons why not deal with Rolls Royce for engines instead of Motor Sich?

Yak-130 engines are also made with there cooperation.

Might find that if they were designed by Motor Sich that pretty soon they will be made in Russia. If not then the AL-55 made by Saturn might be used instead for the Russian Yak-130s.

MIG is run by former Irkut managers. how a factory manager is running a design bureau? ever though about that.

Company managers just need to know how to manage companies. It is the company that contains the human and material resources that design aircraft.

thats why they have too built there own and not waste time and money on old projects.

But if they kill off their aircraft design companies and destroy competition within their own industry they will end up without an industry. For every aircraft competition in the Soviet Union there would ususally be 3-5 contenders from different design bureaus depending upon the type. Some can be eliminated quickly as obviously being too outlandish, but there are usually two serious competitors to keep the designers on their toes.

If you allow MIG to die then the next fighter project for Russia will be a one horse race. Who will push Sukhoi?

MIG will join this year to OAK and will mostly be relegated to UAV stuff.

Have you told OAK this?

According to this:

http://www.ato.ru/rus/cis/archive/20-2008/def/def3/

Specifically this:

According to Alexey Fedorov, head of the United Aircraft Corporation, another aircraft designer — MiG Corp. — is developing a lightweight multi-role frontal aircraft (LMFS), which is said to be similar to the US Joint Strike Fighter.

Now if the role of MIG within OAK is to be UAVs why would the head of OAK mention that MIG is working on a light 5th gen fighter?

recycling and reusing with raw materials?

Yes. You know. Take 10,000 empty Al drink cans and melt them down and make new aircraft from them instead of buying more Al. Same with other metals and various types of plastics etc etc.

AWACS and tankers are better to be far away from battlefield with Meteor/AIM-120D coming up.

An AWACs is a powerful sensor but also a very powerful jammer too. No point in hiding your sensor assets if they are too far away from the battle to see what is happening.

U can use tankers over the oceans when there is no threat. SAM coverage ranges are increasing.

You can use tankers anywhere there is no threat. The point is that most oceans are international waters so if you are attacking someone they could park a ship in international waters and deny you the ability to operate tankers there.

u can put bigger EO sensors on Su-35. u havent justified why MIG-35 is necessary?

You haven't justified why Su-35 is necessary either.

[quote]War is won by shiniest toys provided it is backed up by proper training and correct political and economic policies.
[quote]

So who had the Shinier toys... the US or the VC?

Past was a mistake so it is better to learn from West who make the most expensive stuff.

So you want to learn from Japan? They make the most expensive stuff... their F-16s cost twice as much as American F-16s. But Japan just takes American stuff and makes it with their own components at two to three times the price. Means they are investing their money in their own industries but at the end of the day their armed forces really don't get value for money.

u can built much more Flankers with same amount of money.

So now Flankers are cheaper than Fulcrums?

UAVs/UCAVs roles will be greatly expanded against low threat targets. u dont need fighter.

The only UAVs in Russian service right now are the artillery spotting Pchelkas and of course the Tu-143 Reis. Neither have the endurance or capabilities anywhere near what you are talking about. Right now a Mig-29 could do the job and a Mig-29SMT could do a better job but no UAVs or UCAVs are currently available that could do that job for Russia. Till the Skat is operational of course.

For single aircraft but u need alot of energy and labor to convert raw materials in meaningful way.

Indeed you do, which shows a fighter is rather more than just its component parts reduced to raw materials.

Short range MIG-29 with limited sensors is not part of any solution.

There are no short range Mig-29s with limited sensors. Mig-29s are medium range aircraft with datalinks to ground based radars that give them excellent sensor range. Their onboard radars contribute to that radar picture by adding low level features.

Aircraft carriers are not part of solution either considering the costs and time to deploy/support.

Americas greatest problems in its global reach is foreign basing. Do you really think if lots of tankers were the solution and you could get away with not using aircraft carriers or foreign bases that they would? Three B-52s set out on a round the world flight to set a record. They needed over 60 inflight refuellings to make that nonstop flight. The Soviet Union could not have done that at that time. Russia probably couldn't do that now without a lot of planning and preparation and foreign good will support.

u dont build nuclear aircraft carrier for 30 aircraft.

Why not? How many aircraft do you think the Brits had on the Hermes?

How many fighters do you need to protect a carrier group?

How many carriers are in a carrier group?

Only Fast moving Stealth bombers, aircraft are the solution.

Yes, you are very westernised. Airpower won WWII afterall... and Kosovo.... Oops no it didn't. In fact when was the last time airpower did win a war? It hasn't.

They consume less energy, they are fast to deploy, less personal are required to fly and maintain them, sensors can see further because of height and with Nano technology u dont need big radars or jamming equipment of Battleships either.

They are easy to hide from. They can't take or hold ground or sea. They are flashy showoffs of no use. If you think using only airpower would have helped in Chechnia or Afghanistan then you are dreaming the dream... but the bad news is that that is all it is... a dream.

That EO suite can also be put on Su-35. u havent provided any reason why MIG-35 is necessary or has already been ordered?

I don't have any evidence the Su-35 will be ordered either.

so why it cant afford Stealth fighters in greater numbers?

Because they don't need them. If the AF gets lots of stealth fighters, the Army will demand T-95s in large numbers too. The Navy will want more as well. How can you justify wasting money on lots of fairly useless stealth fighters when so many other things in the Russian military need money too.

It is twice of MIG ranges with less than twice of fuel and longer life engines with better payload flexibility and now there is 2500L tanks also so even more flexibility interms of range.

Twice range compared to old smokey inefficient old engines. Besides fuel is not included in maintainence costs. 2,500L fuel tanks can fit on Migs as well.

Why u need to create a separate aircraft to engage JSF?. U create one Best aircraft to engage all the threats.

Because JSF is stealthy Buccaneer, not a real fighter. You can use a smaller cheaper 5th gen fighter to deal with the 1,200 odd JSFs and B-2s while the PAK-FA can cross swords with the F-22s.

Maintain MIG-27 would have required money to operate. They just get rid of it.

If they had Mig-27s operational they could have flown them low and slow over Chechnia to observe instead of using big Su-27s. Mig-27 is better armoured than Su-27s and probably wouldn't have been lost to small arms fire like the Su-27 was.
It would have also been much more effective and accurate in a strike role in Chechnia.

MIG-29 is redundant.

If by redundant, you mean in service doing a good job, then yes it is redundant... just like the Flanker.

5th generation fighter is monoply over the others.

Yes. Monopoly is good. That is why Russia should give up its 5th gen fighter program. Only USA should have 5th gen stealth aircraft. In fact the US should keep all the foreign funds invested in JSF and not export that either so that only the USA has 5th gen fighters.

Brilliant.

[star49]

I am talking in terms of current and near future options. Right now there are less than half a dozen Su-34s in the Russian AF and they are fitting out and having manuals written for them. A surgical strike right now would be made by Su-24M2s. A long range strike will be by Tu-22M3s. When the Su-34s are available in numbers and are properly operational they will be the weapon of choice. Later there might be a few sneaky beak missions where secrecy is paramount and a PAK-FA might be used.

Current option is Su-27SM that has SAR mode like Su-30MK2. There is no option with MIG-29 or Su-24 in terms of numbers and sophistication and range.

And an energy war in the future it is not possible that if things turn and change that NATO might think regime change in Russia and seizing Russian resources might be necessary?
A border dispute with Georgia with Georgia as part of NATO might serve as a Gulf of Tonkin incident part III.

Nato does not have the money to do anything. It will create more debt and seeing how credit squeezed. I dont expect any stuipidity.

Su-27BM is also being called Su-27SM2.

have u read about Putin visit where he said new built fighters should be bought instead of ugprading old one.

Few airfields means fewer targets for the enemies to hit to take out your AF. It also makes mission planning for the enemy because interceptors will be coming from fewer directions... easier to plan for. Equally with fewer airfields they suddenly become very busy with everyone needing to train or perform operations... chaos.

But it is much better defended when sophisticated airdefence and underground protection. There is personal shortage already which is getting worse.

Which is silly. How do you get a wealthy society in the first place without good decisions?

How Singpore/SK/Japan/China got wealthy at much faster rate than West?. Russia has to maintain even faster rate than them.

What makes you think that? They have about 68 aircraft. If it takes 3-4 years for one then it would take 100 years for all aircraft. You are talking rubbish.

First 4 will be upgrade by Russia the rest is HAL job. and it may take upto 2013 to complete.

Serbian aircraft were upgraded in less than 3-4 years. They knew what they wanted and paid for it and got it in the timeframe they wanted it.

Serbian aircraft nowwhere at Su-27SM level with new engines, fbw, IRST, EW , datalinks etc.

Indeed they are, which makes it all the harder to say one is better than another based just on a few parameters like flight range, radar size and number of weapons pylons.

Sukhoi has much longer life than any MIG plain built. do u think Chinese/Indian/Malaysians/Algerian/Ruaf are stupid?

Of course they will, but they are not going to use a Ukrainian component when a Russian component is just as good if not better. Especially if they have to start paying in Euros for things.
The Russians have introduced a lot of Russian kit to replace items formerly from other Soviet Republics. Some of the kit is even joint developed with western firms... if they are going to pay Euros and deal with a foreign country for parts or weapons why not deal with Rolls Royce for engines instead of Motor Sich?

They will continue to use Ukrianian components as long as it is economical. There is no AL-55 on Yak-130 for next 5 years alteast when all Ruaf planes will be deliveredl.

Might find that if they were designed by Motor Sich that pretty soon they will be made in Russia. If not then the AL-55 made by Saturn might be used instead for the Russian Yak-130s.

They are using MIG-AT test bed for AL-55. Yak-130 engine contract is with Salut. These are long term contracts.

Company managers just need to know how to manage companies. It is the company that contains the human and material resources that design aircraft.

You were claiming that it is design bureau that are incharge. But now it is factory that is incharge and design bureau is a subcontractor.

But if they kill off their aircraft design companies and destroy competition within their own industry they will end up without an industry. For every aircraft competition in the Soviet Union there would ususally be 3-5 contenders from different design bureaus depending upon the type. Some can be eliminated quickly as obviously being too outlandish, but there are usually two serious competitors to keep the designers on their toes.

Those design bureaus will close down with time anyway when no one wants to join them.

If you allow MIG to die then the next fighter project for Russia will be a one horse race. Who will push Sukhoi?

The government will push Sukhoi to deliver.

Have you told OAK this?

According to this:

http://www.ato.ru/rus/cis/archive/20-2008/def/def3/

Specifically this:



Now if the role of MIG within OAK is to be UAVs why would the head of OAK mention that MIG is working on a light 5th gen fighter?

can he say that he is building 5th generation for Ruaf? The answer is no. It is just make impression in IAF tender regarding MIG future. It is beyond the technical and financial ability of MIG to make 5th generation fighter on its own. not even external partern can afford it.

Yes. You know. Take 10,000 empty Al drink cans and melt them down and make new aircraft from them instead of buying more Al. Same with other metals and various types of plastics etc etc.

nope. It is maintaining and flying aircraft that is huge expense. U only need the best to fly.

An AWACs is a powerful sensor but also a very powerful jammer too. No point in hiding your sensor assets if they are too far away from the battle to see what is happening.

The otherside also got AWACS and AWACS has huge RCS signature. The only point for AWACS is to guide the aircraft to battlefield and use fighter radars in last moment for execution.

You can use tankers anywhere there is no threat. The point is that most oceans are international waters so if you are attacking someone they could park a ship in international waters and deny you the ability to operate tankers there.

Oceans are pretty big. u cannot cover that with Ships. there is always space for airrefueling at safe distance and long range of Flankers gives that flexibility.

You haven't justified why Su-35 is necessary either.

It is clearly related to PAK-FA both for testing and industrial reasons.

So who had the Shinier toys... the US or the VC?

do u think US used all its power in right way?

So you want to learn from Japan? They make the most expensive stuff... their F-16s cost twice as much as American F-16s. But Japan just takes American stuff and makes it with their own components at two to three times the price. Means they are investing their money in their own industries but at the end of the day their armed forces really don't get value for money.

Japanese have the right idea of introducing composites, LCD and AESA radar but external influences make the project expensive. Russia doesnot have that hinderance. They have to implement Japanese manufacturing techniques. why do u think they machinery from Mitsubishi? because they want to implement those procedures of efficiency and quality.
www.npo-saturn.ru

So now Flankers are cheaper than Fulcrums?

compare knapo Su-30MK2 price with Algerian SMT for same year? i am not even going into new built MIG-29K/M price. IN agreement was signed in 2004

The only UAVs in Russian service right now are the artillery spotting Pchelkas and of course the Tu-143 Reis. Neither have the endurance or capabilities anywhere near what you are talking about. Right now a Mig-29 could do the job and a Mig-29SMT could do a better job but no UAVs or UCAVs are currently available that could do that job for Russia. Till the Skat is operational of course.

It does not mean they are going to waste money in upgrading old aircraft. they will better spent that money in developing UAV which takes less time than upgrading old MIGs.

There are no short range Mig-29s with limited sensors. Mig-29s are medium range aircraft with datalinks to ground based radars that give them excellent sensor range. Their onboard radars contribute to that radar picture by adding low level features.

There is MIG-29SMT in Ruaf?

Americas greatest problems in its global reach is foreign basing. Do you really think if lots of tankers were the solution and you could get away with not using aircraft carriers or foreign bases that they would? Three B-52s set out on a round the world flight to set a record. They needed over 60 inflight refuellings to make that nonstop flight. The Soviet Union could not have done that at that time. Russia probably couldn't do that now without a lot of planning and preparation and foreign good will support.

It is better to spend money in building tankers than wasting money on foreign bases. . how do u think Bear manages 20 hr patrol? or Su-34 10 hrs?

Why not? How many aircraft do you think the Brits had on the Hermes?

How many fighters do you need to protect a carrier group?

How many carriers are in a carrier group?

when the price of labor, energy and raw materials goes through the roof. No one in right frame of mind will built a carier for 30 aircraft? 30 aircraft just dont have any impact on large battfield.

Yes, you are very westernised. Airpower won WWII afterall... and Kosovo.... Oops no it didn't. In fact when was the last time airpower did win a war? It hasn't.

Airpower can win wars when used in right way and in future holds for airpower alone. Tanks are going obsolete.

They are easy to hide from. They can't take or hold ground or sea. They are flashy showoffs of no use. If you think using only airpower would have helped in Chechnia or Afghanistan then you are dreaming the dream... but the bad news is that that is all it is... a dream.

without airpower things would be alot more difficult. Why do u think they want to increase helicopters/UAV/aircraft production but not not ground sysems in same proportions. Future is for airborne troops that u can drop with speed.

I don't have any evidence the Su-35 will be ordered either.

there is no need for some thing so obvious.

Because they don't need them. If the AF gets lots of stealth fighters, the Army will demand T-95s in large numbers too. The Navy will want more as well. How can you justify wasting money on lots of fairly useless stealth fighters when so many other things in the Russian military need money too.

I told you so. Tanks are obsolete. These are bought in small numbers just for industrial reason. no one is going to waste steel on building them. aircrafts both civilian and military are going towards composite.

Twice range compared to old smokey inefficient old engines. Besides fuel is not included in maintainence costs. 2,500L fuel tanks can fit on Migs as well.

2500L tanks and MIG? show me on MIG website.

Because JSF is stealthy Buccaneer, not a real fighter. You can use a smaller cheaper 5th gen fighter to deal with the 1,200 odd JSFs and B-2s while the PAK-FA can cross swords with the F-22s.

Cheaper 5th generation is oxymoron. there is little cost difference between single and twin engine and twin engine atleast gives you more safety, acceleration, supercrusie and bigger space for radar and power supply. no one is going to waste money on small 5th generation fighter. Why do you think bigger AWACS is preferred over smaller one?

If they had Mig-27s operational they could have flown them low and slow over Chechnia to observe instead of using big Su-27s. Mig-27 is better armoured than Su-27s and probably wouldn't have been lost to small arms fire like the Su-27 was.
It would have also been much more effective and accurate in a strike role in Chechnia.

MIG-27 does not even have range and payload of Su-27 and more than likely they would have lost in greater numbers because of there unsophisticated nature.

If by redundant, you mean in service doing a good job, then yes it is redundant... just like the Flanker.

why they are deploying Flankers to Kant airfield but not MIG-29?

Yes. Monopoly is good. That is why Russia should give up its 5th gen fighter program. Only USA should have 5th gen stealth aircraft. In fact the US should keep all the foreign funds invested in JSF and not export that either so that only the USA has 5th gen fighters.

Brilliant.

I am telling building and operating twin engine 5th generation is beyond financial and technical ability of most of the world. so whats the point of lowering the bar with single engine with less performance.