You are right about engines, ASEA radar and use of composite materials (Mig-29 about 1-2% / Mig-35 >25%) , that's why i have said we need to upgrade our facilities. Also, MiG-35 has already completed factory trials and is now under Air Force assessment.
Egypt getting MiG-29M2 instead of MiG-35 needs a source??
IAF don't want russian plane this time.
"MiG-35 is a new export variant that combines the modern systems of the MiG-29M2 with an AESA radar. The fighter plane has the thrust vectoring of the MiG-29OVT as an additional option"
It is not referred to as MiG-35. Only people that call 29M2 as 35 are seeing the same thing as the demonstrator that was built on the 29M2 airframe.
Yes initially it is referred as 29m2 then 35 (may be to please Egyptians/ or media picked it up wroung) so this confusion exists. And you are right about that Mig-35 (Russian Air force / may be for Egyptian Air force according to wiki) is upgraded version of 29m2 which i have also stated earlier. Full extent of Egyptian deal is not clear and may be they get upgrades in next batch.
About operational cost, the russian products are not known to be cheap and reliable.
Even Mig-29 operational cost is much more cheaper then Rafale, further more; the average cost of Mig-35 flight personnel hours decreased by 2.5 times compared to MiG-29.
1) No Mig35 are in an operationnal fleet, so no return about costs.
Any manufacturer can claim anything to market their product. Fact remains that no one, not even the Russian AF themselves has seen it fit to invest in the MiG-35. Only Egypt has purchased the slightly watered down MiG-29M2 so once they come into service we can see what the fuss is about. However, what IS known is the sub-standard performance and various issues the IN has had (and continues to have) with its MiG-29K fleet and similar issues IAF is facing with upgraded MiG-29UPG fleet. There is a very good reason why IN doesn't want any more K's for its new 57 jet requirement. There was an equally good reason why IAF never pursued follow-on orders for the "cheap and effective" MiG-29 after the initial order...even though they practically begged for more M2K's.
May I claim that the operationnal cost of Rafale is 2 times less than Mirage 2000 ? (reality is that Rafale costs 16% more than M2000 to operate)
And there is the problem! The Mig 29 itself is a low benchmark, since it's operational cost were already high. So even if the Mig 35 would cost less, it still can't compete with the reliability and life of western fighter techs and systems.
No it won't, it only comes with the F4 as a standard equipment of the Rafale while Qatar and Indian upgraded their fighters additionally with the capability enhancements to cover the shortfalls. Neither Egypt nor French forces will get standard F3Rs with HMS.
The name explains it IR search and track, which is not possible with the TV channel!
If that would be true, why did the French forces officially asked for such a weapon after Libya? Why did they prefered Brimstone? Why do they have to use 250Kg AASM or LGB kits, modified with concrete warheads today, to cover this shortfall?
That means a fighter with deep modifications (totally new engine + TVC on this new engine) !
NO.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Rafale in Croatian Air Force | Military Aviation | 6 | |
| W | Rafale and F 18 super hornet shortlisted by Indian navy | Indian Navy | 21 | |
|
Indian Navy more likely to select F 18 than rafales | Indian Navy | 164 | |
|
|
Greek Rafale vs Turkish EF 2000 Who has the Technolocal Edge | Military Aviation | 5 |
