MiG News

[ROCK45]

A interesting little bit I found.

May 29, 2008
Corp. Pres. Says MiG No Prob.
// The head of MiG talks about joining the united corporation and the world market for Russian planes
Belov on MiG and its future
The Russian airplane maker MiG was converted from a federal state unitary enterprise to a joint stock society (OAO) in March, and it is to be made part of the United Aircraft Corp. (UAC), and one of its chief assets, by the end of the year. That process is being guided by MiG’s new general director, Anatoly Belov, who replaced UAC president Alexey Fedorov in that post. In his first interview in his new capacity, Belov tells Kommersant about the state of affairs at MiG, export contracts and reorganization plans.
When will MiG Corp. join UAC? The date has been moved back more than once.

This year, I think. Ernest & Young is expected to complete the assessment of the corporation in June, and then the usual integration process is planned.

How much will the complications with the contract to deliver fighter jets to Algeria influence the assessment? [A contract for 28 MiG-29SMT and 6 MiG-29UB jets was signed in March 2006, but the first 15 were returned by Algeria due to complaints about their condition.] MiG has considerable debts from 2007.

The debts were accrued mainly because of the problems with the Algerian contract. Nonetheless, the planes were produced and, consequently, are among the company’s assets. Therefore, I think the value of the company will not be significantly reduced. And we are in intensive negotiations for the sale of those planes.

The Algerian Air Force paid $250 million up front for those planes. Are they demanded the return of their money?

The discussion of the procedure to reverse the contract is still ahead. That is when questions of mutual settlement will come up.

At UAC, they say the Russian Air Force is considering obtaining the planes Algeria returned.

The Air Force is interested in all 34 MiG-29SMT’s planned for delivery to Algeria. A Defense Ministry commission inspected them and came to a positive conclusion about the quality of their assembly. Air Force pilots have tested the planes’ various modes in the air and responded well to them.

If the Defense Ministry buys them, will the price be lower than in the contract with Algeria?

It is expected that the price will be somewhat lower than the export price.

The Russian Air Force does not take planes with foreign avionics. Will you have to change the planes’ insides?

Yes, in that case, minor changes will have to be made. They will be insubstantial and will not affect the deliver cost or schedule.

Are there export offers on the planes?

Yes, there have been enquiries, some from our traditional partners. We are prepared to consider them subsequent to the delivery of the Russian Air Force.

The Russian side offered Algeria more modern MiG-29M2 or MiG-35’s in exchange. Is that offer still in force?

MiG has made the offer. The decision is the Algerian side’s.

What is MiG’s portfolio of orders now?

About $4 billion plus $2.5 billion in options in the period up to 2010-2011. And the market is not exhausted. We add quite solid sums to that portfolio every year. In the next few years, we will promote four planes – the MiG-29SMT, MiG-29K/KUB, MiG-29M/M2 and MiG-35.

Can MiG’s share of the world market be estimated?

Of the total number of jet fighters produced in the world, about 70 percent of them are light- or medium-weight models. That is the niche MiG works in and it has good prospects there. Of course, the production rates of our competitors are higher than ours, we have already started to regain our position on the market, looking to the potential of the company and state support.

How does the falling exchange rate of the dollar affect MiG exports?

It’s a problem. It affects the economics of the corporation and creates complications not only for MiG, but for our partners as well. The Federal Military-Technical Cooperation Service and Rosoboronexport, naturally, are aware of this and are negotiating with our clients to solve it.

How is the Indian tender for the purchase of 126 fighter jets that MiG is participating in? India has already extended it.

Only the deadline for filing the technical-commercial proposals was extended. By one month. We turned in all materials with Rosoboronexport within the deadline. The next stage is a demonstration of the equipment for the customer.

Considering India’s leisurely pace, do you expect the results of the tender soon?

India may change its plans, if necessary. But so far the process is coming along within the deadlines Delhi set at the very beginning.

Rosoboronexport is conducting negotiations with India on changing the price and deadlines on the contract to deliver the aircraft carrier Admiral Gorshkov. The contract for the delivery of the 16 MiG-29K/KUB planes includes an option to buy an additional lot of MiG’s for the ship. Can the delay with the Gorshkov interfere with those plans?

We discussed that question with the Indian side at a high level, and we were promised that the situation with the aircraft carrier would not affect our contract. In June, we will begin to train Indian pilots. In the next few months, we will hand over the first four planes to the Indian customer. They will be used for technical training for the flight and technical personnel. The other eight will be delivered by June 2009. We are waiting for information on contract deadlines from the Indian side.

A number of technical problems had to be solved during the modernization of the engine for the MiG-29K/KUB. Will that delay deliveries of those planes?

There are no serious difficulties. All of our partners’ schedules are being met. One plane is already completely ready and another is almost done.

Do the Indians plan to build a test range like Nitki in the Crimea to imitate the decks of an aircraft carrier?

They have such plans, and we will help the Indian Navy with it. In the nearest future, plans are to train Indian pilots to fly from regular airfields. In the long term, we will train pilots on an imitation aircraft carrier. Negotiations are underway with Ukraine about that.

There was an announcement in the press with references to the Indian Navy that, if the F-18 wins the tender for the 126 jet fighters, they will be delivered onto two aircraft carriers now being built alongside MiG-29K/KUB’s. How do you see that possibility?

Yes, I saw that the Indian Navy allegedly put forward such an initiative. We doubt that information. It’s not the first disinformation about the tender. As a rule, the Indian side disavows such reports.

MiG Corp. has signed a contract for the modernization of 63 MiG-29 jet fighters delivered to India earlier. What are the parameters of that contract?

The total cost is about $1 billion. The first planes should arrive in Russia in the coming months so that their future technical characteristics can be worked out. Then MiG will transfer the technology for their modernization to India. Our specialists will be sent to India to assist them and MiG will provide the Indian side with all necessary equipment. All the Indian Air Force MiG-29’s will be modernized, six of them in Russia and the rest in India.

It was announced at Le Bourget last year that there are customers for the MiG-29M/M2.

Yes, there are certain customers for the fighter.

And for the MiG-31?

We have made proposals, there are customers ready to buy, but we wouldn’t want to name those customers.

What are MiG Corp.’s perspectives on the Eastern European market?

We offer the countries where there are jets in the region several options for modernization: deep, medium and light. The choice of option depends on the country’s capability and tasks before MiG. A number of projects are already being implemented. For example, 12 MiG-29SD’s were recently handed over to the Slovakian Air Forces modernized to NATO standards and put into service.

Will purchases of MiG’s by the Russian Air Force increase?

There are no major changes planned in the state arms program through 2015, but now a new program is being prepared for 2010-2020. The MiG Corp. has several interesting offers that may be carried out as part of it.

Could the Air Force declare a tender for the development of light and medium fighters of the fifth generation soon?

I assume the one heavy fighter [now being developed by Sukhoi] will not fulfill all the tasks now before the Air Force. A plane of a lighter class is objectively necessary, so we continue to work in that area.

But that tender is only possible after 2015?

Why? The process can begin sooner. It’s a decision for the Russian government, Defense Ministry and the chief commander of the Air Force.

Does the corporation intend to continue the MiG-AT program? The Russian Air Force chose the Yak-130 as a training warplane and there are no orders for it on the international market.

The MiG-AT has participated in several training programs and it is premature to talk about the complete end of the program.

At the Moscow Airshow, MiG Corp. demonstrated the Skat drone. Does it have any chance of being included in the state weapons program?

We are counting on that.

Will OAO Chernyshev Moscow Heavy Industry Enterprise and OAO Klimov, MiG’s engine-building assets, be split off from MiG Corp., as previously planned?

Since MiG is entering the UAC, its management will hold negotiations with Oboronprom on incorporating Chernyshev and Kilmov into the engine-building holding. MiG is counting on receiving management of the stock in the Nizhny Novgorod Sokol, which will permit us to optimize out production programs.

Only the 38-percent state share package in Sokol belongs to UAC. Will MiG Corp. make a proposal to the private shareholder in Sokol to buy their packages?

That is being discussed now.

A year and a half or so ago, the possibility was being considered of ordering a wing for a MiG-29 produced by Sokol from Irkut or even Komsomolsk.

That was temporary, while Sokol recovered. The Nizhny Novgorod plant had a difficult period, but now it meets MiG Corp.’s demands.

How does MiG Corp. intend to reorganize its production capacities? How long will the facilities in Moscow be open?

MiG production is carried out in three facilities, in Moscow, Lukhovitsy and Nizhny Novgorod. We cannot get by without the Moscow facilities today. Plans to gradually cut down production in Moscow are being discussed with UAC now. But that would have to be done very cautiously, since several thousand people work here.

Which will be the main facility?

Both Sokol and Lukhovitsy will both be developed and the workload divided between them, including types of fighters.

The president signed a decree on February 20 on the creation of the National Aviation Center in Zhukovsky. When will MiG be able to transfer its engineering center to Zhukovsky?

We fully support that project, it is going in absolutely the right direction. As for the time, of course, plans have to be consolidated with Ilyushin, Tupolev, Irkut and Sukhoi. Our only desire is that the move not affect our production process, since MiG is one of the few integrated companies, uniting everything from planning to production.

At the end of March, there was talk at UAC about the possibility of a stopgap option – the construction of a new building at the production facility in the Khodinskoe Pole area [of Moscow] where the UAC engineering center and corporation’s headquarters could be located.

Highly technical problems associated with the placement of UAC and its services are being solved. Various options are being discussed, including the one you mention. Since MiG Corp. is still not part of UAC, I have not devoted a lot attention to it yet.

You came to MiG Corp. at a difficult moment connected with the Algerian contract. Why did you leave the prosperous Irkut Corp. for the problematic MiG?

I don’t consider MiG problematic. The situation at MiG reflected what has happened in all of the Russian aviation industry. They are the same problems, to greater or lesser degree. The most important of them had been solved through the efforts of the previous management: production reform had been begun, we participated in the Indian tender with planes from the new product line and the MiG-29K project had been brought to a successful end. I have no doubt that we will restore the authority of the MiG brand.


Interviewed by Alexandra Gritskova and Konstantin Lantratov

link
http://www.kommersant.com/p897204/r_1/aviation_industry/

[nevidimka]

I'm glad to see that the Mig is healthier than I expected.

[Chrom]

I'm glad to see that the Mig is healthier than I expected.

Mig right now have more problems with experienced workers / engineers than with money. Rumors they have more orders than they can realistically fulfill. I speak here about new airframes Mig-29M2/Mig-29K/Mig-35, not slightly upgraded old ones from USSR stocks, a-la Mig-29SMT.

[Salty Dog]

Mig right now have more problems with experienced workers / engineers than with money. Rumors they have more orders than they can realistically fulfill. I speak here about new airframes Mig-29M2/Mig-29K/Mig-35, not slightly upgraded old ones from USSR stocks, a-la Mig-29SMT.

Pretty tough for an aircraft company with a world renown pedigree. They were a foremost fighter aircraft company with notewothy aircraft still widely in use today. That sort of ends with the Mig-29 model/airframe and MiG has yet to produce a noteworthy successor. Perhaps the move to the UAC may brighten Mig's future.

[ROCK45]

I was thinking about if Russia/MIG had a finished Mig-29M1 or M2 two-seat attack model complete and ready for production. I made a quick list of maybe buyers please add other maybe buyers, I'm sure I'm leaving out a bunch.

India - Without sounding to harsh Russia couldn't take any longer and India couldn't take any longer either making a selection.
Algeria - Looks like they might have lost a $2 billion dollar customer
Libya - still might happen but must be paying attention to what's going on in Algeria.

The smaller clients who might pick up from 8 to 20 aircraft:
Syria - one never knows
Sudan - if less attention was being paid to the fighting one never knows
Eritrea-?
Peru- Arms purchasing is picking up some in South America, Peru's economy doing a little better
Ethiopia ?
Sri Lanke - I think may have order 5 currently? I remember seeing something on this not to long ago. Still looking?
Burma - Not now I realized that but remember seeing some place they didn't like the Chinese aircraft might have been just been the Q-5.
*Keep thinking I leaving out one or more from Europe
Iran - ?
Yemen -?

My point being not every country wants or needs a large full size fighter and China's J-10 isn't ready export sale yet. Some aren't allowed or don't want F-16s/Gripens and Rafale & EF20000 totally in a different price range. I think MIG missed a market chance from 2001 to 2007. I think there's still currently a market now for the Mig-29 in some form just smaller then it was. A lot would have to do with being able to produce a land version of the Indian K model Fulcrum built on completely new frames. For countries who don't need stealth I think there's a market for 4th+ fighters that don't cost over $110/120 million per.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I was thinking about if Russia/MIG had a finished Mig-29M1 or M2 two-seat attack model complete and ready for production. I made a quick list of maybe buyers please add other maybe buyers, I'm sure I'm leaving out a bunch.

India - Without sounding to harsh Russia couldn't take any longer and India couldn't take any longer either making a selection.
Algeria - Looks like they might have lost a $2 billion dollar customer
Libya - still might happen but must be paying attention to what's going on in Algeria.

The smaller clients who might pick up from 8 to 20 aircraft:
Syria - one never knows
Sudan - if less attention was being paid to the fighting one never knows
Eritrea-?
Peru- Arms purchasing is picking up some in South America, Peru's economy doing a little better
Ethiopia ?
Sri Lanke - I think may have order 5 currently? I remember seeing something on this not to long ago. Still looking?
Burma - Not now I realized that but remember seeing some place they didn't like the Chinese aircraft might have been just been the Q-5.
*Keep thinking I leaving out one or more from Europe
Iran - ?
Yemen -?

My point being not every country wants or needs a large full size fighter and China's J-10 isn't ready export sale yet. Some aren't allowed or don't want F-16s/Gripens and Rafale & EF20000 totally in a different price range. I think MIG missed a market chance from 2001 to 2007. I think there's still currently a market now for the Mig-29 in some form just smaller then it was. A lot would have to do with being able to produce a land version of the Indian K model Fulcrum built on completely new frames. For countries who don't need stealth I think there's a market for 4th+ fighters that don't cost over $110/120 million per.

For non western aligned users MiG-29 M/SMT is the only realistic middleweight 4th gen fighter on the market. The only other option is the J10, and as you stated its not availible for export and wont be for a significant ammount of time. If MiG had marketed a fully multirole MiG 29M/M2 for about the $30mil mark the russians would have filled a substantial hole in the market with a capable and affordable product. But now anyone who can afford the extra cash is buying the much more capable SU-30MK2/SU-30MKX for as little as $50mil a copy, and the cheap end of the market is about to be blown away by the JF-17, which should be priced in the sub $20mil price bracket and be inferior but comperable in capability. Of cource why would you pay $30mil+ for MiG 29M when you could pay <$20mil and still have a supersonic, 9G, multirole fighter with R77/SD-10 capability, PGM capability, a fully glassed cockpit with HOTAS, and a decent muti-mode radar. With the money saved you could invest in some support elements suck as KCski or AWACSski. Then with the SU-35 about to hit production, anyone (non western aligned) who can afford it will buy it, considering the capability and price.

Still there is some real promise in the MiG 35, it provides the user with capabilities that significantly exceed any of its non western competitors for a reasonable price. If it wins the Indian MRCA competition, in the 2012+ timescale it should be a formidable competitor to the J-10 in the non western fighter market.

[nevidimka]

I dont see how anyone can compare the Newest gen Mig29 to the JF17. If the JF17 is 20mil+ n mig29 30mil+, the smart money will be on the mig29, as its airframe is much more advanced n its capabilities are also more advanced and upgrade capable.

Regarding Mig market.. I was abit pissed with NATO expansion.. with Mig markets being flushed out just because of " not NATO standard" or " cant interoperate" reaons being dished out n then Lockheed coming in n selling thier planes n getting a profit out of it.

And Regarding the Mig 35, I think Mikoyan should have done a little bit more on it. LIke reshaping some parts like engine intakes to make it more stealthy frontal aspect, adding RAM etc.. ala F 18 SH. That would have made it more attractive and comparable to F18 SH in the world market. Also a new uprated engine with superior dry thrust performance should have been developed.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

I dont see how anyone can compare the Newest gen Mig29 to the JF17. If the JF17 is 20mil+ n mig29 30mil+, the smart money will be on the mig29, as its airframe is much more advanced n its capabilities are also more advanced and upgrade capable.

Thats the point, in the small/medium sized, non western aligned market a $10mil difference is a lot. And if you've only got ~$500m to spend on your fighter purchase, JF-17 is going to look mighty attractive considering it does everything MiG 29 does, the only difference is in scale. I'm not saying MiG 29M/SMT is not a better platform, it is. However JF-17 can still deliver all of the weapons MiG-29 can. In terms of value for money JF-17 is much better, and therefore the funds you can use to acquire support elements/improve the wider system are larger, which has a bigger impact on war-fighting capability than an airframe (VLO excluded).

And Regarding the Mig 35, I think Mikoyan should have done a little bit more on it. LIke reshaping some parts like engine intakes to make it more stealthy frontal aspect, adding RAM etc.. ala F 18 SH. That would have made it more attractive and comparable to F18 SH in the world market. Also a new uprated engine with superior dry thrust performance should have been developed.

MiG 35 is the 4th MiG 29M2 prototype IIRC, therefore designing a whole new airframe would have meant a much larger, costlier and riskier program. Sinking the engines to hide the engine faces (reduce RCS) would have been a HUGE redesign, and MiG 35 would have been a totally new platform. The risk in that would be huge considering there's no firm contracts only possibilities, all for limited returns (a little RCS reduction is handy, but considering the huge cost and risk it obviously wasn't worth it). By significantly improving the platforms combat management system, HUI, ISTAR capabilities through the ZHUK-AE AESA radar (as primitive as that system is) and the OLS MIG have transformed the Fulcrum from a point defence fighter with a limited PGM capability to a fully muti-role platform with an excellent mid altitude/stand off strike capability comparable to any western 4.5th gen fighter, without significantly redesigning the airframe. Not too shabby.

[Chrom]

I was thinking about if Russia/MIG had a finished Mig-29M1 or M2 two-seat attack model complete and ready for production. I made a quick list of maybe buyers please add other maybe buyers, I'm sure I'm leaving out a bunch.
They are more or less ready for production, but quite large order is required to warrant new production line. One cant buy just 10 Mig-29M2 for average price - either 50+ order or cost will be exorbitant high.

Mig-29K for India somewhat dampened that problem as many parts are common for both Mig-29K and Mig-29M2 - but only partially. Mig's main income now is from upgrading/supporting old models - Mig-29/Mig-27/Mig-21 etc.

Besides, for large future orders Mig-35 is better option. It is more or less ready except AESA radar.

[Salty Dog]

Thats the point, in the small/medium sized, non western aligned market a $10mil difference is a lot. And if you've only got ~$500m to spend on your fighter purchase, JF-17 is going to look mighty attractive considering it does everything MiG 29 does, the only difference is in scale. I'm not saying MiG 29M/SMT is not a better platform, it is. However JF-17 can still deliver all of the weapons MiG-29 can. In terms of value for money JF-17 is much better, and therefore the funds you can use to acquire support elements/improve the wider system are larger, which has a bigger impact on war-fighting capability than an airframe (VLO excluded).


A very valid point Ozzy on the cost issue. I'm sure there is a fighter market out there with countries that need fighter replacements for a modest budget. Countries still flying their F-5, Mig-21, A-4 , etc. would not need such high tech-high performance (high maintenance cost) fighters. A capable multi-role fighter in the US $15 - $20M category should be profitable.

[Salty Dog]

MiG 35 is the 4th MiG 29M2 prototype IIRC, therefore designing a whole new airframe would have meant a much larger, costlier and riskier program. Sinking the engines to hide the engine faces (reduce RCS) would have been a HUGE redesign, and MiG 35 would have been a totally new platform. The risk in that would be huge considering there's no firm contracts only possibilities, all for limited returns (a little RCS reduction is handy, but considering the huge cost and risk it obviously wasn't worth it). By significantly improving the platforms combat management system, HUI, ISTAR capabilities through the ZHUK-AE AESA radar (as primitive as that system is) and the OLS MIG have transformed the Fulcrum from a point defence fighter with a limited PGM capability to a fully muti-role platform with an excellent mid altitude/stand off strike capability comparable to any western 4.5th gen fighter, without significantly redesigning the airframe. Not too shabby.

The right time may have already passed, but I wonder how things would be in the Mig-29 world if Mig had gone the same route as Boeing with the Super Hornet by giving a larger more capable airframe to the Mig-29 whilst sharing many commonalities on the support/servicing side to the legacy Mig-29.

[Chrom]

A very valid point Ozzy on the cost issue. I'm sure there is a fighter market out there with countries that need fighter replacements for a modest budget. Countries still flying their F-5, Mig-21, A-4 , etc. would not need such high tech-high performance (high maintenance cost) fighters. A capable multi-role fighter in the US $15 - $20M category should be profitable. For these countries Mig-29SMT could be very attractive option. Cheap, proven, wide weapon selection, future easy transition to Mig-35.

[Feanor]

Here's a little something (rather insightful on the poor state of the Mig) about the production for the M2 variant.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080530/108906687.html

It's set to start no earlier then 2010. Seems like the MiG-35 is not anywhere near production, if the MiG-29M2 is only going to enter serial production in 2010.

[ROCK45]

Thanks Feanor good to see it might happen but 2010 they might lose the India bid by then even. If they could shave a year off that and list and show the Russian AF squadron going through there pre-training that would sell fighters. In the article it says
the fighter will be sold both at home and abroad, This is the important part to me if Russian pick up a squadron or two it would go a long way for showing the "staying" power of the fighter.

[Chrom]

Here's a little something (rather insightful on the poor state of the Mig) about the production for the M2 variant.

http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080530/108906687.html

It's set to start no earlier then 2010. Seems like the MiG-35 is not anywhere near production, if the MiG-29M2 is only going to enter serial production in 2010.

This can happen even later if there is no large order. All talks about "home" users is just wishful misinformation. Foreign consumer is much more likely - but to launch first aircraft in 2010 they should have hard order right now, as it takes nearly 2 years to take fully ready aircraft to production.

This means 1 thing - Mi-29M2 is fully ready for production. For how many years already ready - is up to speculation. Most likely the design is constantly updated and serial production Mig-29M2 will be quite different aircraft from 10-years ago proposals.

[Feanor]

The demonstrations of MiG-29M2 began in iirc 2001. My whole point was that it's old news, and it's still not being produced. MiG is in some serious trouble. Comes after the failure of the Algerian deal (iirc the Algerians requested more Su-30MKA's instead of the cancelled MiG's with negotiations still in progress right now).

[nevidimka]

Whats the point of producing the aircraft when there is no orders. I'm sure Mig is trying to save cost that way. They already have the demonstrator out for customers. IF they have orders, I'm sure they'd porduce it quickly.

[Feanor]

The lack of orders is of course another issue. And again why was the original Algerian deal done for the SMT variant if the more advanced M2 was all ready to go? Might there be something after all to the claim that the planes were of inferior quality? Perhaps not the actual quality of the work but overall performance?

[Chrom]

The lack of orders is of course another issue. And again why was the original Algerian deal done for the SMT variant if the more advanced M2 was all ready to go? Might there be something after all to the claim that the planes were of inferior quality? Perhaps not the actual quality of the work but overall performance?


May be because Mig-29M2 costs 2x times more? May be because production of new airframe require 1-2 years more than just upgrading avionic on old ones?

Or do you think Mig-29M2 would be sold for the very same price as Mig-29SMT?

[Ozzy Blizzard]

May be because Mig-29M2 costs 2x times more? May be because production of new airframe require 1-2 years more than just upgrading avionic on old ones?

Or do you think Mig-29M2 would be sold for the very same price as Mig-29SMT?

I agree, MiG-29SMT and MiG-29M2 are two totally different beasts. Its akin to a MLU F-16 Block 30 with a LITENING pod thrown in, compared to a F-16 Block 52+, two very different platforms with two very different sets of capabilities with two very different price tags.

[nevidimka]

SMT is just an upgrade, I'm sure its much cheaper compared to the M2 which is a new airframe with new systems. I belive the Algerians 1st wanted to just upgrade at lower cost, instead of buying a new plane which is basically the same type of airframe. But once they got thier planes... they had a change of heart n looking at the SU 30 purchase by new cliets over the world made them want a bigger fish, n used claims like poor quality to justify their decision making mistake.

So far theres no Mig 29M custormers, hence why IMO there arent any Mig29M/M2 in production.

[Feanor]

The lack of customers is again an interesting phenomena. Morever does anyone know what standard the Indian MiG-29's are being upgraded to? Were they initially MiG-29S? Or something more advanced?

Chrom if they wanted cheaper aircraft they chose correctly. However after turning down the deal they requested more Su-30MKA instead, which is a heavy multi-role fighter. So they obviously wanted the extra capability and liked the aircraft despite the price. Negotiations are going on right now, with Russia trying to offer the M2 and Mig-35 to them.

[nevidimka]

The lack of customers is again an interesting phenomena. Morever does anyone know what standard the Indian MiG-29's are being upgraded to? Were they initially MiG-29S? Or something more advanced?

Chrom if they wanted cheaper aircraft they chose correctly. However after turning down the deal they requested more Su-30MKA instead, which is a heavy multi-role fighter. So they obviously wanted the extra capability and liked the aircraft despite the price. Negotiations are going on right now, with Russia trying to offer the M2 and Mig-35 to them.

Which is why Like I said.. they had a change of heart, and they took the easy way out by accusing Mig of poor workmanship. Mig's construction quality has grown leaps n bounds from thier soviet era. Just look at old Mig29 pics n compare them to the latest models.. u could hardly see the bolts? jutting out. And i'm sure they did a good job with the SMT, but Algeria wanted to reduce thier losses if they had to pay for the SMt and then order more Su30 for thier fleet.

[Feanor]

Well how large of an airforce does Algeria want to fly? 28 MKA's and 36 MiG's is hardly enough to cover their needs. They need more airframes either way.

EDIT: Again it seems like they were genuinely disappointed with the performance of the SMT. Hence why they 1) Insisted on returning the jets 2) None the less asked for a different Russian jet instead of running to foreign sources.

[ROCK45]

nevidimka
Whats the point of producing the aircraft when there is no orders

I was re-reading the thread and saw this and wanted to mention that this is a little backwards. Its a Russian thing not to produce a finished aircraft before entering production. The French didn't wait until they had an order before finishing at least a few Mirage 2000's? The US didn't get other countries to invest in the F-16 without actually finishing a F-16 and showing they could make it, right? Customers have input and can request certain equipment/systems installed or not installed but they still have to see a full finished aircraft. MIG still isn't capable of producing a Mig-29M or Mig-35 and there's a big difference between painting Mig-35 on the side of one of six or seven prototypes and then actually making one.

Until MIG gets its act together India would do wise and not going with them for the 126 aircraft purchase. Out of all the selections the Mig-29 has the least future unless India gets to build everything from A to Z on it, other wise look western you get what you pay for.

Like I mentioned earlier what a market share might have been lost between 2001 to 2007. MIG leadership is only surpassed by Rafale sales personnel in the world of aviation. Even if in 2004/2005 if they got the Mig-29M produced with say only F-16 Block-30 tech built into it they would have had sales.

I was never able to read or find any info on Yemen's SMT Fulcrums on whether there really capable of using smart weapons or if the radar and engines have really improved. In a way improving on a Mig-29A/SE wouldn't be to difficult right 1989 was a long time ago. Can I really assume a SMT Fulcrum is so much more capable then a A/SE type Fulcrum? Flying a air show produced aircraft around and saying "I can make this please buy me? isn't working out for MIG very well and hasn't in almost ten years.

[Salty Dog]

It's probably worth taking a closer look at the Mig-29K/KUB which should be the most recent Mig-29s in production.

[ROCK45]

From the specs the K model looks interesting and shows promise if the engines and radar perform etc. I always felt even with 16/19 frames that this is basically a custom order and not a full fledge production lines for like a large fighter run? I assume India will base a lot off of the K before committing to any Mig-29M or Mig-35, which makes sense. I would also like to see Russia releasing more info on the K's AG capabilities. For India I would like to see the K/M Fulcrum wins to be used like a F-16 in both attack & fighter. It's a little off topic for here but you never hear much about Su-30s types in AG role either.

For a short to mid range attacker I would like to see the K be able to carry (2) 500lbs LGB, mark targets for themselves-some sort of pod, carry 4 air to air missiles - to defend itself to and from the target area, plus 2 drop tanks. Sound possible?

[Feanor]

The MiG-29K/KUB has started serial production this year. It is not a custom order, it was originally created for the Soviet Naval Carrier Aviation, but the Su-33 was chosen over the MiG-29K. As for SMT vs S MiG's, the SMT has new cockpit displays, more fuel capacity, Zhuk-ME radar vs. the older Phazotrom N-019M, interestingly enough apparently both can fire the R-77, and the SMT has an increase in hardpoints under the wing. Though my information might not be 100% accurate, as I only did a quick search for the info.

EDIT: A question, globalsecurity.org claims a large numbers of VVS Fulcrums were upgraded to the SMT standard. Is this true? The literal quote is:

In 1998 a decision was made by the Defense Ministry to launch a quantity-modernization program of the MiG-29 fighters. A total of 150 to 180 modernized MiG-29SMTs will be introduced in service with the Russian Air Force. Extensive modernization is planned only of the aircraft produced through the previous decade. This will provide a dramatic increase in combat capabilities of the Russian Air Force. The modernization program started in September 1998 by the Kubinka military aircraft-repair plant and the MAPO MIG. 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. Starting from the year 2000, the program's annual modernization rate was expected to reach 40 MiG-29SMTs. The overall plan provides for modernization of 150 recently manufactured MiG-29s, with the remainder of the older aircraft being withdrawn from service (presently there are 330 MiG-29 aircraft in Russian combat units and 130 in training units).

The entry is obviously dated, but it states that a total of 30-45 SMT's were actually delivered at the time of the entry with prospects for more.

http://www.globalsecurity.org/military/world/russia/mig-29smt.htm

EDIT2: aviaport.ru seems to at least confirm the delivery of 20 aircraft in '99.

В 1998 году ВВС заказали три самолета МиГ-29СМТ (первый модернизированный самолет передан Липецкому центру боевого применения и переучивания летного состава ВВС в январе 1999 г.). Заказ на 1999 год составил 20 самолетов. Всего планируется доработать в вариант "9-17" 180-200 истребителей МиГ-29 "9-13".

http://www.aviaport.ru/directory/aviation/469.html

[nevidimka]

I was re-reading the thread and saw this and wanted to mention that this is a little backwards. Its a Russian thing not to produce a finished aircraft before entering production. The French didn't wait until they had an order before finishing at least a few Mirage 2000's? The US didn't get other countries to invest in the F-16 without actually finishing a F-16 and showing they could make it, right? Customers have input and can request certain equipment/systems installed or not installed but they still have to see a full finished aircraft. MIG still isn't capable of producing a Mig-29M or Mig-35 and there's a big difference between painting Mig-35 on the side of one of six or seven prototypes and then actually making one.

Until MIG gets its act together India would do wise and not going with them for the 126 aircraft purchase. Out of all the selections the Mig-29 has the least future unless India gets to build everything from A to Z on it, other wise look western you get what you pay for.

Like I mentioned earlier what a market share might have been lost between 2001 to 2007. MIG leadership is only surpassed by Rafale sales personnel in the world of aviation. Even if in 2004/2005 if they got the Mig-29M produced with say only F-16 Block-30 tech built into it they would have had sales.

I was never able to read or find any info on Yemen's SMT Fulcrums on whether there really capable of using smart weapons or if the radar and engines have really improved. In a way improving on a Mig-29A/SE wouldn't be to difficult right 1989 was a long time ago. Can I really assume a SMT Fulcrum is so much more capable then a A/SE type Fulcrum? Flying a air show produced aircraft around and saying "I can make this please buy me? isn't working out for MIG very well and hasn't in almost ten years.

Pls realise your doubting Mikoyan, a big Aviation company.

By your same argument it can be taken that the Mig 29K are not built and cant be delivered on schedule to India, n yet that is not the case. The Mig 29K that won the Indian order must be substancially more modern compared to the 1 that competed for Soviet Navy Aviation with the Su 33 in the 80's, and its already in production.

Btw, I believe the Mig 29 M's and Mig 35 that are being displayed in airshow are good examples already for demosntration to a client. Its probably Mikoyan's thingking that they do not want to waste money building production planes when an order hasnt been made or that the prototype used for display is good enough to display to potential customers that they can build it.

[ROCK45]

nevidimka
By your same argument it can be taken that the Mig 29K are not built and cant be delivered on schedule to India, n yet that is not the case.
How many K model Fulcrums are in India right now? Lets see if the rest can be delivered by 2009 on a four year order for 16 aircraft? Lets first see if India is satisfied with them the proof will be in the package.

The Mig 29K that won the Indian order must be substancially more modern compared to the 1 that competed for Soviet Navy Aviation with the Su 33 in the 80's, and its already in production.
This isn't really saying much the Fulcrum was well behind the times in the 80s

Btw, I believe the Mig 29 M's and Mig 35 that are being displayed in airshow are good examples already for demosntration to a client.
I disagree with you it doesn't mean anything, flying around a demonstration aircraft doesn't mean you can produce every nut and bolt in a functional aircraft, not by a long shot. If it takes four years to make 16/19 Fulcrums for a small Indian Navy order what makes you think they have production lines capable of really making a sixty/eighty aircraft run if an order came in? The cool little devices and other goodies that MIG say can go into a Mig-29M or a Mig-35 Fulcrum are not made. There not laying around a MIG production line waiting to pop into a fighter. For example a MIG employee can't just reach into a parts bin and pull out a ASEA radar or the Italian radar warning device and install it because it's not there. The difference from a air show prototype to a real production aircraft is like night and day.

Pls realise your doubting Mikoyan, a big Aviation company.
I don't get what your saying really there not big or small just miss managed. If they were a western style aircraft company and not just from the United States the upper management would have been replace a long time ago.

[Feanor]

I disagree with you it doesn't mean anything, flying around a demonstration aircraft doesn't mean you can produce every nut and bolt in a functional aircraft, not by a long shot. If it takes four years to make 16/19 Fulcrums for a small Indian Navy order what makes you think they have production lines capable of really making a sixty/eighty aircraft run if an order came in? The cool little devices and other goodies that MIG say can go into a Mig-29M or a Mig-35 Fulcrum are not made. There not laying around a MIG production line waiting to pop into a fighter. For example a MIG employee can't just reach into a parts bin and pull out a ASEA radar or the Italian radar warning device and install it because it's not there. The difference from a air show prototype to a real production aircraft is like night and day.

First off the MRCA iirc only 18 aircraft are to be delivered completed. The rest are to be assembled in India under license from kits provided. Second off MiG did manage to produce the Algerian SMT's on time despite the poor production capabilities.

I don't get what your saying really there not big or small just miss managed. If they were a western style aircraft company and not just from the United States the upper management would have been replace a long time ago.

And finally the director of MiG has been replaced following the Algerian deal. MiG is now iirc set to merge with OAK.

Here's an interesting interview with him.

http://livefist.blogspot.com/2008/05/migs-new-general-director-answers-india.html

[ROCK45]

Hello Feanor thank you for your input but please look at the first post the one I used to start the thread. You'll see the same man is the focus in both articles but that's alright maybe he can get MIG going in the right direction. (smile face)

Finishing the Algeria order on time was a good thing for MIG. I never felt there was anything wrong with the Fulcrums that was politics and natural gas issues mixed together.

irst off the MRCA iirc only 18 aircraft are to be delivered completed. That might be a difficult feat to pull off just by itself and yet to be proven but we can hopeful.

The management change is late in coming but better late then never. (smile face)

Feanor- Let me ask you since Russia isn't war currently and doesn't plan to anytime soon right would cut operational cost to run a few more Fulcrums squadron then the Su-27 squadrons? In Russia is there any operational cost comparison pitting the Fulcrum against a Flanker? What I'm say like for every hour a Flanker flight it take like six hours of maintenance? I'm looking for maintenance stats like that. I assume there both close since they both have twin engines but after that I know little of inners of Russian built aircraft. Maybe you might be able to shed some light on this which is the better or lower maintenance aircraft? Thanks

[Feanor]

Hello Feanor thank you for your input but please look at the first post the one I used to start the thread. You'll see the same man is the focus in both articles but that's alright maybe he can get MIG going in the right direction. (smile face)

Finishing the Algeria order on time was a good thing for MIG. I never felt there was anything wrong with the Fulcrums that was politics and natural gas issues mixed together.

Again, given that they're asking for Super Flankers to replace them, it doesn't seem to be a politics thing. It seems to be a genuine disappointment with the SMT variant.

That might be a difficult feat to pull off just by itself and yet to be proven but we can hopeful.

That would not at all be difficult to pull of. If there was no difficulty in making the ~30-40 SMT's for Algeria, 18 MiG-35's by 2012 would not be any harder. It would take time to modify the production facilities, but I'm pretty sure as the MiG-35 is simply a development of the MiG-29M2, the Sokol factory which is starting MiG-29M2 production in 2010 should be able to do it.

Feanor- Let me ask you since Russia isn't war currently and doesn't plan to anytime soon right would cut operational cost to run a few more Fulcrums squadron then the Su-27 squadrons? In Russia is there any operational cost comparison pitting the Fulcrum against a Flanker? What I'm say like for every hour a Flanker flight it take like six hours of maintenance? I'm looking for maintenance stats like that. I assume there both close since they both have twin engines but after that I know little of inners of Russian built aircraft. Maybe you might be able to shed some light on this which is the better or lower maintenance aircraft? Thanks

I'll try to find some info, but I can't promise anything. Again I think it also depends on the variant and the availability of funding.

[swerve]

...
That would not at all be difficult to pull of. If there was no difficulty in making the ~30-40 SMT's for Algeria, 18 MiG-35's by 2012 would not be any harder. ...

But surely, MiG did have difficulty in making SMTs for Algeria. I thought it was established that they pulled white tails out of storage & refurbished & upgraded them, instead of building new.

MiG has been surviving for years on upgrades & refurbishments, & selling off the aircraft stored straight off the production line when the USSR went tits-up. I suspect it can now only build new fighters at a very low rate. How many new - and I mean really new, not old but unused, fighters has MiG delivered in the last 10 years?

[Feanor]

That's a good question. I don't know. By the way the SMT's were mostly new, with only some elements built in the 90's (after the collapse of the Union) and kept in storage.

[nevidimka]

I check abit on the Algerian SMT, n i found out that the there were some parts used which were old. But Russian Experts say that shouldnt be a problem because those parts were certified by Russian company or Mig.. I forgot. but its certified.

So Algerian's concern may be true, howver I think Mig can redeem themselves getting the Algerians to agree to the Mig 35.

[Feanor]

Here's a little something on MiG-29 maintenance and reliability. Now granted the article talks about mainly the older MiG-29's.

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-2b.htm

EDIT: Here's a little more the MiG-29SMT variant.

[5] 9-17 MIG-29SMT / 9-51T MIG-29UBT

* The failure of the MiG-29M and MiG-29K to enter production meant lean times for the MiG OKB, whose fortunes seemed to be on a steady decline in the new Russia. Outside observers wondered of the great name of MiG might be headed for extinction, as it steadily withered during the 1990s while the Sukhoi organization was awarded new fighter contracts.

The pendulum appears to have swung back, however, and now the new "Rossiskaya Samoletostroitelnaya Korporatsiya MiG (RSK MiG)", as the revitalized organization has been refashioned under their new leader, Mikhail Korzuev, appears increasingly energetic, has been promoting a range of improved MiG-29 variants.

* While a ground-up redesign like the MiG-29M was out of the question, major improvements could be made with less drastic measures that could be implemented in either new-build aircraft or as upgrades to existing aircraft. The Russian Air Force wanted to upgrade upgrade over 400 existing MiG-29s, providing a strong incentive.

The result was the "9-17 MiG-29SMT", which can be considered a revival and extension of the various MiG-29S upgrade efforts of a few years earlier. The MiG-29SMT features a glass cockpit based on that of the MiG-29M, but with twin 15 by 20 centimeter (6 by 8 inch) full color flat panel LCDs, instead of the smaller monochrome CRTs using the MiG-29M, as well as two smaller monochrome LCDs.

Modern HOTAS controls were implemented as well, and the MiG-29SMT also features a MIL STD-1553B compatible digital databus to link the cockpit and the avionics systems. An advanced navigation system, using laser gyros and a satellite positioning system receiver, has been fitted, as well as built-in diagnostic systems to ease maintenance.

To deal with the range issue, the MiG-29SMT features a particularly swollen "hunchback" spine, and can also be fitted with a bolt-on inflight refueling probe. The spine terminates in a beavertail like that of the MiG-29M, which can accommodate one or two parachutes as required by aircraft load.

The MiG-29SMT retains the top-and-bottom airbrake scheme of the 9-12 MiG-29, though the dorsal airbrake is larger, and also retains the old scheme of chaff-flare dispenser strakes. While there are no other major modifications to the airframe, old MiG-29s upgraded to the MiG-29SMT specification would be refurbished to give them 20 years of airframe life.

Unrefueled range of the MiG-29SMT is cited as 2,200 kilometers (1,370 miles) without external tanks, almost half again as great as that of 9-12 MiG-29. Multirole capabilities are provided by an improved N-019M Slot Back radar, with greater range, wider field of view, and the ability to track ten targets at once. It appears that the MiG-29SMT can carry an external targeting pod, and can certainly carry reconnaissance pods. The MiG-29SMT can use all the advanced weapons that were qualified for the MiG-29M, with a total external stores load of 4,000 kilograms (8,800 pounds) on six stores pylons.

Although much has been loaded onto the MiG-29SMT's airframe compared to the original 9-12 MiG-29, the new variant's performance has not suffered and in fact appears to be improved, thanks to new, more powerful Klimov RD-43 engines with over 10,000 kilograms (22,000 pounds) afterburning thrust. However, it appears that most of the MiG-29SMTs built so far still have some variant of the RD-33, due to delays in engine production, but the two types of engines are mechanically compatible and engine upgrades should be straightforward.

Initial flight of the first MiG-29SMT prototype was on 29 November 1997, with Marat Alykov at the controls. This machine was a modification of a company prototype that had already been used in the MiG-29S effort, and did not include all the features expected for the "production" MiG-29SMT.

The first full-standard MiG-29SMT, also a conversion of a company demonstrator, performed its first flight on 14 July 1998, piloted by the MiG organization's new chief test pilot, Vladimir Gorbunov. This aircraft was demonstrated at the Farnborough Air Show in the UK in 1998.

* RSK MiG followed up the MiG-29SMT with a similar effort to produce a a second-generation two-seater, the "9-51T MiG-29UBT", essentially a company 9-51 MiG-29UB fitted with improvements developed for the MiG-29SMT.

The MiG-29UBT features a swollen spine to provide more fuel, with the larger dorsal airbrake and the beavertail of the MiG-29SMT, and also can be fitted with a bolt-on inflight refueling probe. The front-seater's cockpit layout is very much like that of the MiG-29SMT, but although the back-seater still has flight controls, the rear panel layout features a large CRT to display TV or infrared camera imagery provided by external pods.

While the MiG-29UBT can be used as a trainer, its focus is clearly for roles such as precision strike, with the back-seater targeting and guiding smart munitions while the pilot flies the aircraft. No radar system was fitted to the MiG-29UBT demonstrator, but RSK MiG clearly intends to fit any production aircraft with an advanced combat radar system in a modified nose.

* Russia's financial problems have made funding MiG-29 upgrades difficult. If the Russian Air Force has plans to upgrade their existing MiG-29s to the MiG-29SMT, they are now in a hazy state, and there is no evidence that the MiG-29UBT has fared any better.

RSK MiG hasn't given up, however. Russian Air Force pilots have given glowing reports on evaluations of the MiG-29SMT, and the update price is a quarter of that of a new fighter, while operating costs are less than two-thirds of a 9-12 MiG-29.

RSK MiG is promoting the MiG-29SMT as part of range of updates of increasing sophistication:

* The simplest upgrade revives the "MiG-29SD" designation, and more or less takes its cue from the MiG-29Ns sold to Malaysia, with the upgrade program providing an airframe overhaul, a bolt-on refueling probe, improved Russian radar, and Westernized avionics.

* The second-level upgrade revives the "MiG-29SM" designation. This upgrade features the fit of a console CRT and other improvements to support use of smart air-to-surface weapons.

* The "MiG-29SMT-1" is basically the current MiG-29SMT with the N-019M Slot Back radar, as well as Westernized avionics.

* The "MiG-29SMT-2" is similar, but incorporates the high-end N-010 Zhuk-M radar.

http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avmig29.html

[Salty Dog]

Here's a little something on MiG-29 maintenance and reliability. Now granted the article talks about mainly the older MiG-29's.

http://www.sci.fi/~fta/MiG-29-2b.htm

EDIT: Here's a little more the MiG-29SMT variant.

http://www.faqs.org/docs/air/avmig29.html

We should look at the current Russian/Mig philosophy on aircraft maintenance. I recall the hallmark of the 50's/60's generation of Russian (Soviet) fighters (mainly Mig) was their simplicity and robustness. This meant low cost and greater numbers when compared to western counterparts. Soviet aircraft maintenance (as well as customer countires) philosophy was "Fly to Failure". This especially suited customer counties which had little/poor infrastructure to support AIMD or depot level maintenance. That was back when fighters were mainly analog and easy to maintain/repair, therefore this maintenance philosopy was suitable.

Current fighters are mainly digital and require a huge proportion of maintence hours per flight hour. The newer generations are highly sophisticated systems when compared to their predecessors and their initial and life-cycle costs have skyrocketed.

IMHO the Russian philosophy of aircraft maintenance would also need to change from analog to digital. "Fly to Failure" would not be prudent and maintenance hours and costs will increase. Tie all this to the increasing sophistication of the aircraft and customer countries will need to pay more in the long haul.

Western fighters have long gone the route of periodic/scheduled maintenance in the digital world and AFAIK these are priced into their life cycles.

In the long run, it will be interesting to see how the Mig (and Sukhoi) systems will finally cost to their customer countries and what maintenance philosophies they will follow.

[Chrom]

But surely, MiG did have difficulty in making SMTs for Algeria. I thought it was established that they pulled white tails out of storage & refurbished & upgraded them, instead of building new.

? For 100th time. Mig-29SMT are BY DEFINITION made from aircrafts "pulled white tails out of storage & refurbished & upgraded them, instead of building new". MIG-29SMT is UPGRADE variant. They cant be build new.

[Chrom]

We should look at the current Russian/Mig philosophy on aircraft maintenance. I recall the hallmark of the 50's/60's generation of Russian (Soviet) fighters (mainly Mig) was their simplicity and robustness. This meant low cost and greater numbers when compared to western counterparts. Soviet aircraft maintenance (as well as customer countires) philosophy was "Fly to Failure". . You get it completely wrong. "Fly to failure" wasnt used in any developed country.

The real thing was different: Till the later 90x russian philosophy in aircraft industry was "use the part (or even whole engine) till guarantied life/km/etc". And then just replace it without any checking. Old parts (engines) are send back for refurbishing to big maintenance depots or manufacturer.

Contrary, western approach was "check the part, and continue its use if it is ok". If not, replace it in field condition.

Both approaches had its merit. Russian ones required much less qualified field technicians, less advanced devices and instruments - which is especially important in bad prepared airfields, forward deployment and 3rd-country users. This also allowed somewhat higher reliability.

Western approach gave much higher service life for components and reduced maintenance cost in peace time. In turn, the maintenance required much higher qualification, much more expensive & much better prepared airfields and technical instruments.

This also resulted (by all things equal) in somewhat lower reliability due to non-ideal ability of the technical staff to determine exact wear of components and still somewhat worse field instruments compared to big stationary depots .

Keeping in mind how in the last 50 years absolutely most aircrafts ended they life peacefully in scrapyards - the later approach won.

[Feanor]

For 100th time. Mig-29SMT are BY DEFINITION made from aircrafts "pulled white tails out of storage & refurbished & upgraded them, instead of building new". MIG-29SMT is UPGRADE variant. They cant be build new.

... yes they can. You can easily build new airframes and give them the interior package of a SMT. Nothing stops that from happening. Just because the Su-30MK is an upgrade of the Su-30K doesn't mean you pull old airframes out and upgrade them......

[Chrom]

... yes they can. You can easily build new airframes and give them the interior package of a SMT. Nothing stops that from happening. Just because the Su-30MK is an upgrade of the Su-30K doesn't mean you pull old airframes out and upgrade them......

This is word twisting. Yes, pure theoretically it is possible. But in practical terms it is like ordering new Mig-21 "Bison" from Russia. There is no production line for such old aircraft like basic Mig-29, there is no suppliers for many airframe parts. I'm sure Algerian werent that stupid to expect indeed just in 9 month produced "old" type aircraft from scratch.

[Salty Dog]

This is word twisting. Yes, pure theoretically it is possible. But in practical terms it is like ordering new Mig-21 "Bison" from Russia. There is no production line for such old aircraft like basic Mig-29, there is no suppliers for many airframe parts. I'm sure Algerian werent that stupid to expect indeed just in 9 month produced "old" type aircraft from scratch.

This is an interesting point you bring up about the Mig-29 production line and parts suppliers. One of the cost factors in fighter production is all the special fabrication machines, tooling, assembly line facilities, testing/calibration stands, etc. to produce the aircraft. It's hard to comprehend all this unless you have visited an actual manufacturing plant yourself. All this production equipment does not just disappear, especially if you've had nice production run and intend to sell more as in the case of the Mig-29. The production line gets upgraded just like each successive model of the Mig-29 and IMHO this has to happen as Mig is producing the Mig-29K/KUB as well as plan for possible Mig-35 production.

The same goes for the parts suppliers. They have to keep the world-wide fleets of Mig-29 supplied with parts. IMHO they just can't go away.

One of the recent Mig success stories were the upgrades of Slovakian Mig-29SDs to NATO standards. While we are not talking about a new airframes in this case, parts support, testing, calibration, etc. would be important.

[Chrom]

This is an interesting point you bring up about the Mig-29 production line and parts suppliers. One of the cost factors in fighter production is all the special fabication machines, tooling, assembly line facilities, testing/calibration stands, etc. to produce the aircraft. It's hard to comprehend all this unless you have visited an actual manufacturing plant yourself. All this production equipment does not just disappear, especially if you've had nice production run and intend to sell more as in the case of the Mig-29. The production line gets upgraded just like each successive model of the Mig-29 and IMHO this has to happen as Mig is producing the Mig-29K/KUB as well as plan for possible Mig-35 production.

The same goes for the parts suppliers. They have to keep the world-wide fleets of Mig-29 supplied with parts. IMHO they just can't go away.

One of the recent Mig success stories were the upgrades of Slovakian Mig-29SDs to NATO standards. While we are not talking about a new airframes in this case, parts support, testing, calibration, etc. would be important.

Many airframe parts are just vastly different in the case of basic Mig-29 and new Mig-29M. And well, believe me, in any country after 20 years unused production equipment dissapear. Most of it however could be found in nearest scrapyard...

Btw, absent production line one of major reasons why it is impossible to produce new Mig-29SMT. The production line for Mig-35 is there. But it doesnt have capacity nor required tools to produce Mig-29SMT.

[Salty Dog]

Many airframe parts are just vastly different in the case of basic Mig-29 and new Mig-29M.

This is hard to believe considering Russia would want to make their aircraft affordable, i.e. sharing commonality with previous versions. IMHO there is a bigger difference in the nomenclature, Mig-29 - Mig-29M than in their airframe parts.

And well, believe me, in any country after 20 years unused production equipment dissapear. Most of it however could be found in nearest scrapyard...

Hard to believe this would happen to a company the caliber of Mig.

Btw, absent production line one of major reasons why it is impossible to produce new Mig-29SMT. The production line for Mig-35 is there. But it doesnt have capacity nor required tools to produce Mig-29SMT.

So just how is Mig producing the Indian Navy's Mig-29K/KUB aircraft?

[Feanor]

Chrom unless you have some serious evidence of airframe differences between MiG-29SMT and M variants you're wrong. The Sokol factory is planning on starting production of the M variant within the next several years.

[Chrom]

This is hard to believe considering Russia would want to make their aircraft affordable, i.e. sharing commonality with previous versions. IMHO there is a bigger difference in the nomenclature, Mig-29 - Mig-29M than in their airframe parts.

See yourself. Much bigger internal fuel volume. Much greater use of composites. Lighter weight... some other vital differences. Mig-29M is a whole another beast. Parts are not interchangeable.

Read about Mig-29M, there are some good sites about it. No, i will not point to them.


Hard to believe this would happen to a company the caliber of Mig.

Lol. Not hard at all. Hundreds other companies and factories had it even worse and completely disappeared. Mig may consider itself lucky..

So just how is Mig producing the Indian Navy's Mig-29K/KUB aircraft? New production line. Partially using new suppliers from SU-27 -related plants which had it easer.

[Chrom]

Chrom unless you have some serious evidence of airframe differences between MiG-29SMT and M variants you're wrong. The Sokol factory is planning on starting production of the M variant within the next several years.

Yes, within "next several years". Means, when sufficiently large contract could be signed to warrant new production line.

Besides, we hear that song 15 years already from Mig.

P.S. Understand me right. Mig is far from death, in fact it is on quite fast rise. But right now it cant produce new aircrafts except Mig-29K. After Mig-29K is completed, same production line can be used to produce Mig-29K derivatives or Mig-29M2.

In case Mig wins MRCA contract, new production line will be build.

[Feanor]

A new production line for 18 aircraft and just kits?

[Chrom]

A new production line for 18 aircraft and just kits?
Yes. Do Mig have choice? I mean, in the last 15 years Mig hadnt produced 1 single new airframe. They just upgraded old, already pre-build airframes.

Mig hope follow-on orders from India for Mig-29K. Later, Mig also want to use new Mig-29K assembly line to produce Mig-29M2 / Mig-35.

[nevidimka]

AFAIK SMT is like a MLU for older Mig 29 users. Its the appropriate choice for older Mig29 owners wanting an upgrade. Its not offered for newer customers as the same capabilities n abit more is being offered with the newer Mig 29M,M2,K, and Mig 35. Why would a new customer choose for a new build SMT when the logical choice would be a new build Mig 29M/Mig35.

And regarding Airframes, the Mig 29M,M2,K, and Mig 35 shares much closer airframe design/parts compared to the older Mig 29, which could explain how Mikoyan is building the Mig 29K for India. This is the reason why there is a SMT upgrade for older planes, as they cant be upgraded to Mig 29 M,M2, Mig 35 airframe.

And the Mig 35 demonstrator is currently using the Mig 29M2 demonstrator airframe. the final build may have slight differences in having more composites, and some small redesigns in the vertical tail and spinal tail section.

[Feanor]

Interesting. So we have two sets of Fulcrums, the older ones which culminate with the SMT, and the newer ones which start with the K and go to the MiG-35.

[nevidimka]

I was looking at some Mig35 videos and I notice on closeup view to the engine inlets, it showed some form of a grille inside the inlet.

Is this Grille designed to defeat radar returns from the engines? Does other Mig versions have these grille's?

[ROCK45]

I guess there trying to hide the blades some but I think it's a throw back to the old design of not sucking up dirt and other things on the runway. I thought the older Fulcrums have something setup when the aircraft was on the ground it draws air from the top of the intakes and those grills open up in normal flight? Somebody correct me if I'm wrong.

[nevidimka]

Your right, in the Old Mig when its on the runaway, there are doors which closses the intake n air is sucked in from the louvres on top of the plane. The newer planes had these louvres removed and somehting was made to stop the dirt from getting inside the intakes on ground.

but I'm unsure as to whether these are the grilles that blokes the dirt. But then the grille "appears" to have holes big enough for dirt to go through, n thats just my observation.

[nevidimka]

This is how the Mig 35 will look like in its final incarnation. Longer tail Boom and a reshaped Vertical Tail, plus something i find suprising is the 10 hardpoints on the wing. That would mean 5 on each wing!!

[ROCK45]

I thought 11 hard points because a belly tank could be carried now on the newer models but can't seem to confirm that. Somebody correct me but I thought the early A models or 9.12 types couldn't used the center line tank because of the spent cannon casings? I thought the West Germans address this issues but I'm not seeing that anywhere. If somebody knows one way or another I would like to know if a center line fuel tank could be carried and use the cannon at the same time? On the Mig-35 put a advance radar and weapons suite, 3 large fuel tanks, and eight weapons stations and you got yourself a mid size fighter. I don't know radar's well but think remembering seeing a El-2052 talked about somewhere is that produced and for sale? Israel and India have been working together on a few different projects maybe a radar's and weapons suite could be worked out. Different countries helped with the MKI Flanker why not the Mig-35?

[Feanor]

The MiG-35 has the option of fittin foreign avionics, just like almost any Russian export jet at this point. You could have a MiG-35KI developed for India by simply swapping in the desired systems.

[ROCK45]

Feanor do you know if a belly tank can be carried and fire the cannon at the same time on the Mig-29M/Mig-35? Thanks

[Feanor]

A quick search didn't turn up any info, so I would assume it's the same as other Fulcrum models. I don't have time to look in detail, as I've got to run off to work in ~5 mins. I'll look in more detail either tomorrow, or later today if I get around to it.

[Ozzy Blizzard]

A quick search didn't turn up any info, so I would assume it's the same as other Fulcrum models. I don't have time to look in detail, as I've got to run off to work in ~5 mins. I'll look in more detail either tomorrow, or later today if I get around to it.

IIRC the ejection port has been moved on the MiG-29M/M2 prototypes allowing the use of the gun while the tank is being carried. Since the MiG-35 is the 4th MiG-29M2 prototype i would assume this is the same. I dont have a link for thou though, i;ve got it in a copy of AFM i think, but AFAIK yes the MiG-35 can use the gun with the belly tank.

[Feanor]

Here's MiG Corp. page with the aircraft. Press the name of the fighters to get the official info.

http://www.migavia.ru/eng/military_e/index_mil_e.html

[ROCK45]

Thanks Ozzy Blizzard for the gun belly tank info.
Thanks Feanor for the cool MIG site

So now I guess we wait for news on the Mig-29K and see how they work out. One can assume if India's very impressed with them the K models overall it might go a long way toward landing the big fighter bid?

I check the MIG's site for news every now and then and wish they would release more info.

Still hunting for any Yemen's SMT info comparing the early models to the upgraded types.

Any news on the returned Algeria SMT's? I looked around but didn't see anything.

[Feanor]

Last I heard about Algerian deal is negotiations proceeding. MiG is offering MiG-35 to Algeria, and the VVS are evaluating the SMT's that were returned for induction at lower prices. I hope that we do buy them, because it would help MiG, but more importantly it would help re-arm at least 1 regiment (which is ~20% of the Russian Fulcrum fleet) with new planes.

[ROCK45]

I hope Russia does pick up the SMT Fulcrums maybe some higher up in the chain command will see it can be a useful fighter.

[Feanor]

Compared to the MiG-29S that we're currently flying, it's a more then useful fighter. Though what I'm really hoping for is serial production of the R-77 to finally commence.

[Chrom]

Compared to the MiG-29S that we're currently flying, it's a more then useful fighter. Though what I'm really hoping for is serial production of the R-77 to finally commence.
Seems Russian MOD wait for next, upgraded gen R-77 before buying.

[Feanor]

Do you have any info on one being produced?

[Feanor]

Sorry for the double post but the new Zhuk-AE AESA radar has undergone flight testing. Here's the arms-tass link. Sorry that it's in Russian. The main two pieces of info from it are that there are plans for using mods of this radar in Almaz-Antey GBAD systems, and potential upgrade of VVS fulcrums with this radar.

http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=56587&cid=24

[Chrom]

Do you have any info on one being produced?

There was some info about upgraded R-77 might enter into service in 2009, but we all know how reliable such premature info is. Besides, it is still not clear if upgraded R-77 will be with RAMJET or just vanilla new seeker & slightly better range.

[Feanor]

Quick little newsflash, apparently the MiG-AT (Advanced Trainer) program is still continuing despite the lack of interest by the Russian MoD. It had it's first flight with the new RD-1700 engines recently. Here's the link.

http://arms-tass.su/?page=article&aid=56647&cid=25

[nevidimka]

Personally I like the Yak trainer more than the Mig AT.

[ROCK45]

I like the Yak-130 more to but I think it was political thing as well why one was supported and one wasn’t. Like most things MIG, like trainer project ideas don't get the same funding to really give it a chance. I must admit I'm confused why MIG is investing money in it now unless they feel there is a chance or maybe there are problems in the Yak-130 camp? It does seem to be taking them a long time to get the Yak-130 production rolling doesn’t it? Didn’t Algeria and Venezuela both want it besides Russia’s own AF, so they have orders? Maybe MIG's getting something useful out of the testing that’s it’s worth it for them.

[Feanor]

Algeria and Libya allegedly have orders. Though the exact make up of the Libyan deal was not made public. It might be that the exact make up has yet to be finalized.

[ROCK45]

Did Libya actucally place place an aircraft orders? I looked around but didn't see anything "firm" so I guess it's the same level as the Rafale deal? I do think Russia will get the deal over the French. The F3 model is taking way too long to get into production and there's still the radar issue. Now since since were out of June and into July did Russia deliver the K model Fulcrums? These K models are MIG's big chance I hope for the company future they do a good job.

[Feanor]

Hmm strange. Apparently delivery was to have begun in May. And nothing after that. No confirmation of delivery articles, nothing. Not even a notification of delay.

[hugin]

Hello everbody - this is my first post. I really like to read this forum. Normally, I am just entertained by reading - but I really think MIG 29/MIG 35 is a handsome/heavy plane. A friend of my claimes that the engines of MIG 29 have to be replaced with new engines after 400 hours of flying - compared with a 2000 hours with F 16. No matter the cost of procure - the total cost incl. the maintenance costs of MIG 29 would allways be higher compared to other fighters. My questions to the forum are: 1. Are russian fighters like MIG/Sukoi really (that) cost uneffective compared to other fighters. 2. What could be done? - western engines ?

[Feanor]

This was addressed earlier by Chrom. The thing is that Russian fighters were built for a total war philosophy. They would be used until the nominal engine life expired. Then engines would be replaced. Western aircraft would use their engines until the engines began having problems, and then repair, and only eventually replace the engines. The Soviet approach was tailored to an all out war where the biggest threat wasn't maintenance issues, it was enemy planes and SAMs. The Western approach was more of a peacetime approach. Since then Russian philosophy on maintenance has changed significantly. Newer Fulcrums and Flankers offer significant improvements in engine life. Whether comparable to similar western aircraft or not is debatable, especially since conditions in which they are used are usually notably worse (in terms of spare parts etc.).

EDIT: Chrom I hope I correctly rephrased what you were saying.

[Salty Dog]

This was addressed earlier by Chrom. The thing is that Russian fighters were built for a total war philosophy. They would be used until the nominal engine life expired. Then engines would be replaced. Western aircraft would use their engines until the engines began having problems, and then repair, and only eventually replace the engines.

Not true mate, especially for USA engine maintenance. This is doctrine, not philosophy. Gas turbine engines undergo routine scheduled maintenance whether the engine has problems or not. Engine maintenance is done at the unit level, intermediate level and depot level. I can't vouch for European standards, but I doubt they wait until their engines start having problems.

[Chrom]

This was addressed earlier by Chrom. The thing is that Russian fighters were built for a total war philosophy. They would be used until the nominal engine life expired. Then engines would be replaced. Western aircraft would use their engines until the engines began having problems, and then repair, and only eventually replace the engines. The Soviet approach was tailored to an all out war where the biggest threat wasn't maintenance issues, it was enemy planes and SAMs. The Western approach was more of a peacetime approach. Since then Russian philosophy on maintenance has changed significantly. Newer Fulcrums and Flankers offer significant improvements in engine life. Whether comparable to similar western aircraft or not is debatable, especially since conditions in which they are used are usually notably worse (in terms of spare parts etc.).

EDIT: Chrom I hope I correctly rephrased what you were saying.

Somewhat close, but i should add few points:
1. Engines were replaced, true. But that doesnt mean they were scrapped. They were overhauled in big depots. Only after several overhauls they were out of service.

Also, this philosophy was not aimed solely at wartime. Even in peace time there was considerable fund saving by reducing needs in good prepared airfields, high skilled technicians, and well equipped field depots.

In turn, this also somewhat increased strategical mobility of such forces due to above mentioned advantages.


2. Western technicians of course didnt waited till problems. This is far too dangerous. They, with various instruments, trying to determine reliability and wear of engine parts. It works well most of the times, just not always.

Also, some parts just get replaced after set amount of time. But again, many hard-to-reach parts require high skill, high working discipline and good equipment to replace - something what Soviet engineers tried to avoid as much as possible.

In Soviet conception most of these parts should be only replaced in big industrial depots.

[Feanor]

Yes guys I did try to simplify it. I do understand that parts would be repaired and serviced before they started having problems. Thanks for the correction.

[ROCK45]

I'm on a Mig-29 kick and had a few questions and figure I'll post here. I'm looking for Russian squadrons train against each other. Mig-29 squadrons vs. Su-27 squadron. In the US, F-16, F-15, F/A-18 train against each other all the time I'm interested in reading about Russians training against each other. Does anybody know if there's anything in English I could find on the subject, thanks.

[nevidimka]

I'm on a Mig-29 kick and had a few questions and figure I'll post here. I'm looking for Russian squadrons train against each other. Mig-29 squadrons vs. Su-27 squadron. In the US, F-16, F-15, F/A-18 train against each other all the time I'm interested in reading about Russians training against each other. Does anybody know if there's anything in English I could find on the subject, thanks.

I believe the Malaysian Air force should have some interesting insight into that, but then nothing much comes out of RMAF in the press.

[ROCK45]

Did Sudan receive a shipment of new Russian MIG-29 tactical fighters from Belarus? I saw this but thought Russia and Belarus quote in the press no Fulcrums were delivered? Just trying to confirm it one way or the other and didn't see anything else beside this link. Thanks

Sudan receives new shipment of Russian fighter jets
http://armoreddefense.com/home/sudan-receives-new-shipment-of-russian-fighter-jets/2008/07/24/

[Feanor]

It's rumors. Possible I suppose, but neither side has confirmed it to my knowledge.

[Monox]

Some Mig-29 pictures from the Hungarian Airforce:

http://www.panoramio.com/user/1222070/tags/Kecskem%C3%A9t

[F-15 Eagle]

This might be a little off topic but does Russia still use any Mig-25s? And also how many Mig-31s do they have and have they been upgraded? I can't find anything other than from Wikipedia, any help would be nice.

[Chrom]

This might be a little off topic but does Russia still use any Mig-25s? And also how many Mig-31s do they have and have they been upgraded? I can't find anything other than from Wikipedia, any help would be nice.

Few special Mig-25's are still there (recon, test beds). Rest are retired.

[Feanor]

I think there still are a few squadrons of MiG-25MR's flying. I'll check scramble when I get home.

[Firehorse]

And also how many Mig-31s do they have and have they been upgraded?

Check this tread- http://www.sinodefenceforum.com/showthread.php?t=2608

[ROCK45]

Just reading the below attached article and was a little shocked that it mentioned for the Russia's Su-33 naval fighter replacement fighter choice the Su-27KUB or MiG-29K. Why would they mention the K model Fulcrum not even delivered yet by the way and not the Mig-35? Is the Mig-35 a dead issue? Wouldn't a carrier model Mig-35 be made for Russia's own carrier? Wouldn't it make more sense going with the more advance type with all the cool improvements built in? I always looked at the India K model order as a "special order" for India's carrier and part of the carrier deal, but not MIG's production aircraft for the Fulcrum type. It would seem to be that way since there looking at it as a future type for their own carrier. I haven't heard any Mig-35 news in months and only for the Indian fighter deal does anybody have any updated information?

Thanks

Article
Russian Navy to adopt new carrier fighters after 2016
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080907/116601791.html

[Salty Dog]

Just reading the below attached article and was a little shocked that it mentioned for the Russia's Su-33 naval fighter replacement fighter choice the Su-27KUB or MiG-29K. Why would they mention the K model Fulcrum not even delivered yet by the way and not the Mig-35? Is the Mig-35 a dead issue? Wouldn't a carrier model Mig-35 be made for Russia's own carrier? Wouldn't it make more sense going with the more advance type with all the cool improvements built in? I always looked at the India K model order as a "special order" for India's carrier and part of the carrier deal, but not MIG's production aircraft for the Fulcrum type. It would seem to be that way since there looking at it as a future type for their own carrier. I haven't heard any Mig-35 news in months and only for the Indian fighter deal does anybody have any updated information?

Thanks

Article
Russian Navy to adopt new carrier fighters after 2016
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080907/116601791.html

The Mig-29K is an advanced form of the Mig-29 and includes features for aircraft carrier use such as beefier landing gear and folding wings. The Mig-29 was also tested on the Russian aircraft carriers last decade. The Mig-29K is being delivered to the Indian Navy for use on IN aircraft carriers and it would make sense to keep these in production.

The Mig-35 is a not yet in production as it has not been sold yet. It does not have the beefed up landing gear or folding wings (that would be a waste for a land-based plane).

[Ozzy Blizzard]

Just reading the below attached article and was a little shocked that it mentioned for the Russia's Su-33 naval fighter replacement fighter choice the Su-27KUB or MiG-29K. Why would they mention the K model Fulcrum not even delivered yet by the way and not the Mig-35? Is the Mig-35 a dead issue? Wouldn't a carrier model Mig-35 be made for Russia's own carrier? Wouldn't it make more sense going with the more advance type with all the cool improvements built in? I always looked at the India K model order as a "special order" for India's carrier and part of the carrier deal, but not MIG's production aircraft for the Fulcrum type. It would seem to be that way since there looking at it as a future type for their own carrier. I haven't heard any Mig-35 news in months and only for the Indian fighter deal does anybody have any updated information?

Thanks

Article
Russian Navy to adopt new carrier fighters after 2016
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080907/116601791.html

As salty said the "K" is the navalized fulcrum. You wont be seeing any F-35A's flying of carrier decks, doesn't mean the F-35C has been canned. ;)

[nevidimka]

Just reading the below attached article and was a little shocked that it mentioned for the Russia's Su-33 naval fighter replacement fighter choice the Su-27KUB or MiG-29K. Why would they mention the K model Fulcrum not even delivered yet by the way and not the Mig-35? Is the Mig-35 a dead issue? Wouldn't a carrier model Mig-35 be made for Russia's own carrier? Wouldn't it make more sense going with the more advance type with all the cool improvements built in? I always looked at the India K model order as a "special order" for India's carrier and part of the carrier deal, but not MIG's production aircraft for the Fulcrum type. It would seem to be that way since there looking at it as a future type for their own carrier. I haven't heard any Mig-35 news in months and only for the Indian fighter deal does anybody have any updated information?

Thanks

Article
Russian Navy to adopt new carrier fighters after 2016
http://en.rian.ru/russia/20080907/116601791.html

The Mig 29 K is almost the same as the Mig 35, except the new OLS and the AESA radar which I can think of right now. In that case, the Mig 29K which if adopted by the Navy can easily have these incorporated + other newer developments by the time the competition takes off.

[Salty Dog]

The Mig-29K is lighter, smaller and has less range than the Su-27KUB or the Su-33. It carries less payload. This would be like regressing from a Super Hornet back to the legacy Hornet. Would this be really be a wise thing to do for Russian carrier aviation? I doubt we will see both the Sukhoi and Mig embarked. Is Russia trying to keep Mig in business? I feel they should stay with the Sukhoi line.

[nevidimka]

Or they can make a navalised version of the PAK FA

[ROCK45]

Hello guys
I understand the difference between the K version and other Fulcrums. I thought since MIG is trying push the Mig-35 that they might produce a navalized one that's all. Imagine me thinking MIG might even promote a product and ordered it for themselves.

nevidimka
The Mig 29 K is almost the same as the Mig 35, except the new OLS and the AESA radar
Hi nevidimka thanks for getting involved but that's one of the reasons why I asked if there was any new Mig-35 news. I haven't seen anything in months on or about the Mig-35, which is really a Mig-29M currently. I don' think Russia has a AESA radar in production yet at least released to the public? Just my opinion if there were a operational AESA radar wouldn't a Flanker model be made already since that's what there selling and its Russia's main front line fighter? The OLS is that little round device shown on the Mig-35 mock up right that marks targets? Is the company that makes that operational and is that device even being produced numbers? Isn't that something MIG and sub companies have to setup if they had a customer? It just seems like the whole Mig-35 project has stalled and was hoping somebody may have heard something new. I guess the funding just isn't there thanks everybody for chiming in.

Did anybody hear anything on the K models Russia was suppose deliver in June 08? I was hoping for MIG that they would be delivered on time or even early to sort of help India make their choice what a great chance to cut the line, lost.

[Feanor]

The Zhuk-AE AESA was offered to India on the MiG-35. Sukhoi has yet to get an AESA, but one is in development.

[ROCK45]

Hi Feanor
It would be great for MIG but is really in production? I would have thought more attention in the press would have been made for producing a ASEA radar? I do belive there's still a market for upgraded advance Fulcrums just a little smaller now. I guess we wait on those K models to see what MIG can do just wish more news or info was released.

Thanks

[Feanor]

It's the MRCA that we have to wait for. If India decides to go for the MiG-35 and opts for Zhuk-AE then I guess it will be in production. Until then there are no customers for it.