Military Review

Production of the MiG-35 will start from January 2018.

153
The state order for the manufacture of multifunctional fighters MiG-35 has been received, the assembly of the installation batch of the latest fighters will start at the beginning of 2018, Interfax reports, citing a source in the defense industry.


Serial shipments of MiG-35 Russian Aerospace Forces are included in the state armaments program for the 2018-2027 years. Russian Aircraft Corporation "MiG" will begin to fulfill the state order for the production of the installation batch of aircraft from the beginning of the new year
- the source of the agency said.

Production of the MiG-35 will start from January 2018.


The RSK MiG enterprise in Lukhovitsy near Moscow will be engaged in the production of new fighters, and the Nizhniy Novgorod plant Sokol will undertake a significant amount of aggregate assembly.

The MiG-35 belongs to the generation of fighters 4 ++ and is considered a transitional link to the aircraft of the fifth generation. Electronic equipment allows a fighter to use all existing and prospective ammunition, the fire control system is capable of capturing 10 targets simultaneously.

The main flight characteristics of the MiG-35: normal take-off weight - 19 200 kg. Maximum - 24 500 kg. Maximum speed at altitude - 2100 km / h, on the ground - 1400 km / h. Practical ceiling - 16 000 m. The range of the MiG-35 with air-to-air missiles and three outboard fuel tanks (PTB) - 1000-1400 km (depending on the composition of weapons and the height of the flight), with impact weapons and three PTB - 800-1100 km. Maximum operating overload - 9,0 g.

In January 2017, the new fighter showed the leadership of the country. Vladimir Putin noted the export potential of the machine, since its predecessor, the MiG-29, is in service with more than 30 countries of the world. At the same time, state tests of the aircraft began.
Photos used:
http://www.globallookpress.com/
153 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must to register.

I have an account? Sign in

  1. rpuropuu
    rpuropuu 26 December 2017 14: 25
    19
    Well, finally, the Falcon will do something worthwhile, and not just the modernization of the 31s good The factory was completely bent sad
    1. Lord of the Sith
      Lord of the Sith 26 December 2017 14: 49
      18
      He spoke, but they still argued with me. And the same situation with the Su-57 and on land equipment with the "Armata" and "Coalitions." All this will already arrive in the troops in 2018.
      1. Evkur
        Evkur 27 December 2017 00: 50
        +1
        Well, really in a hurry or gained excellent speed?
        1. Lord of the Sith
          Lord of the Sith 27 December 2017 11: 50
          0
          Hurrying unfortunately ...
    2. Lexus
      Lexus 26 December 2017 14: 51
      +9
      And the Lukhovitsky plant rose from the “ashes”. In the 90s, was plundered to zero.
    3. Sergey53
      Sergey53 26 December 2017 15: 29
      +2
      Quote: rpuropuu
      Well, finally, the Falcon will do something worthwhile, and not just the modernization of the 31s good The factory was completely bent sad

      The factory was bent not of its own free will, but by the spread of it by Pogosyan, who was then head of the UAC.
      1. Ustin
        Ustin 26 December 2017 16: 14
        +9
        In the 90s, Pogosyan was gone, and the plant was already gone. To "rise from the ashes" you need another 5-7 years with good funding and stable orders. So the MiG 35 in the experimental series is not bad, but not the rescue of the Falcon. IL 114-300 will go then it may "rise".
      2. sivuch
        sivuch 27 December 2017 13: 42
        +1
        Didn’t you read about the project of the fighter of a special period? He was wrapped up by his own Mikoyan leadership without any vicious villains.
        Tactical aircraft for Russia - an attempt to market approach
        The creation of a “fighter of a special period” proved to be a difficult task due to more stringent requirements (compared to an attack aircraft). Nevertheless, it was possible to create a project of an aircraft with a normal take-off mass of about ten tons, which in its main tactical and technical characteristics was practically not inferior to the MiG-29. Before providing materials to the Customer, the aerodynamics of the Design Bureau three times recalculated the characteristics, ensuring that the project data did not exceed (!) In terms of their MiG-29, which the Design Bureau at that time touted as "the best fighter for gaining superiority in the air."
    4. Wayfarer
      Wayfarer 26 December 2017 17: 54
      14
      We have a strange situation. There everyone is rearmament on the fifth-generation fighter F-35, and we are starting mass production of the fourth-generation fighter. Seventeen years of high oil prices, and did not bother to develop and launch a fifth-generation light fighter in a series. If the MiG-35 was launched into the series twenty years ago, at least fifteen years ago, then I would be happy, but now it looks like a mockery. Only in the GDP reports is everything wonderful, the government works great. All is well beautiful marquise, all is well, all is well.
      1. APASUS
        APASUS 26 December 2017 20: 10
        +5
        Quote: Traveler
        We have a strange situation

        Nothing strange, we still overcome Gorbachev’s restructuring and the collapse of Yeltsin’s industry
        Quote: Traveler
        We are all re-equipping with the fifth-generation F-35 fighter, and we are starting mass production of the fourth-generation fighter.

        This situation with the MIG-35 has a couple of goals
        1 Recovery of production capacities and technological process
        2 Elimination of skew in the VKS system, where the number of heavy SU fighters is greater, which does not correspond to the goals and objectives.
        Quote: Traveler
        If the Mig -35 was launched into the series twenty years ago, at least fifteen years ago, then I would be happy

        This is just the next step.
        Quote: Traveler
        Only in the GDP reports is everything wonderful, the government works great. All is well beautiful marquise, all is well, all is well.

        Well, this is a topic for the whole conversation, in a nutshell can not describe everything.
        1. Wayfarer
          Wayfarer 26 December 2017 20: 31
          +6
          Quote: APASUS
          Nothing strange, we still overcome Gorbachev’s restructuring and the collapse of Yeltsin’s industry
          Do you even understand what you wrote? Not a penny was invested in the development of PAK-LA. What other restructuring, what industry? What are you talking about? During these 17 years, it was possible to develop an aircraft, prepare production and personnel.
          Quote: APASUS
          This situation with the MIG-35 has a couple of goals
          Yes, there is one goal: fishlessness and cancer.
          1. Scoun
            Scoun 27 December 2017 05: 52
            +6
            Quote: Traveler
            Do you even understand what you wrote? Not a penny was invested in the development of PAK-LA. What other restructuring, what industry? What are you talking about? During these 17 years, it was possible to develop an aircraft, prepare production and personnel.

            Interestingly, you yourself understand what you write?
            About "privatization" remember and remember what it is?
            Remember what the State debt was 17 years ago?
            Remember the Army of 1999, 2008, 2014, their salaries and general technical condition?
            There are so many examples of such “remember” from any industry, to take the same oil industry for receiving a number of oil production technologies .....
            PS.

            It reminds me that “as if I were a queen” ... and here, of course, everyone has their own “vision” of lightness and priority, and of course, for example, the MiG-35 was “more urgent” than the S-400 or the Yars, or the Voronezh radar ... and eat the fish, and hand over the bones, fuck the caviar and then get off the Christmas tree and don’t rip the butt off.
            1. Cxnumx
              Cxnumx 27 December 2017 07: 06
              +3
              Quote: Scoun
              Interestingly, you yourself understand what you write?
              About "privatization" remember and remember what it is?
              Remember what the State debt was 17 years ago?

              do not understand. GDP is to blame and all. they don’t remember about debt, neither about the 90s, nor about the denomination, nor about anything.
          2. APASUS
            APASUS 27 December 2017 18: 31
            +1
            Quote: Traveler
            Do you even understand what you wrote? Not a penny was invested in the development of PAK-LA. What other restructuring, what industry? What are you talking about? During these 17 years, it was possible to develop an aircraft, prepare production and personnel.

            I understand perfectly. The democrats have ruined the industry, and what’s wrong?
            They build ships, but we don’t let out turbines, and we don’t let out a lot of things. We’re not only competing with the West, we would still have to reach the USSR level.
            But why investment is so strange, it’s rather a question for our government.
            Quote: Traveler
            Yes, there’s one goal: fishless fish and cancer

            On which bezrybe?
            In the VKS there was a bias towards heavy fighters, and this is tactically wrong and expensive in economic terms. Columns of equipment (for example) should not be accompanied by heavy vehicles
      2. abc_alex
        abc_alex 27 December 2017 00: 38
        11
        There everyone is rearmament on the fifth-generation fighter F-35, and we are starting mass production of the fourth-generation fighter.


        For starters, there are no normal signs of a “fifth generation” in nature; the term itself was coined by marketers of the US military-industrial complex to explain the spasmodic rise in the price of the Raptor. Therefore, do not be advertised.

        Further, it should be understood that the MiG-35 surpasses Lating in most respects, but simply does not correspond to the schizoid race for stealth. And it will NEVER be recognized as a “fifth generation” aircraft, as see the paragraph above. :)

        The MiG-35 is a great modern car, with great potential for modernization. Moreover, this is "Armata in the air" - a single platform for a whole family of machines for various purposes. This is a full-fledged multi-purpose fighter-bomber created according to the ideology of the "open platform", capable of carrying all types of missile and bomb weapons available to heavy fighters, with the exception of the heaviest and special models.

        This is a great car and it has excellent prospects. Do not belittle the intelligence of domestic aircraft designers. The fact that they are not likened to those sheep who bleat in unison with the US military-industrial complex in Europe does not make their development worse.
        1. Wayfarer
          Wayfarer 27 December 2017 04: 04
          +2
          Quote: abc_alex
          there are no normal signs of the “fifth generation” in nature,
          Since 2006, the creation of the fifth generation PAKFA aircraft has been financed by the state budget in the Russian Federation; in the future, PAKDA will be created. You are sincerely convinced that the SU-57 is a purely marketing move to pump money from the budget of the Russian Federation.
          Quote: abc_alex
          MiG-35 surpasses Lating in most parameters,
          And here is the F-35, compare the Mig-35 with the PAK-LFA fighter that could have been created. Which plane could be better?
          Quote: abc_alex
          they are not likened to those sheep
          Who is the ram here, the question, in my opinion, is obvious.
          1. abc_alex
            abc_alex 29 December 2017 13: 39
            0
            Since 2006, the creation of the fifth generation PAKFA aircraft has been financed by the state budget in the Russian Federation; in the future, PAKDA will be created. You are sincerely convinced that the SU-57 is a purely marketing move to pump money from the budget of the Russian Federation.


            No, the Su-57 is a normal process of evolutionary development of the concept of a heavy fighter, which implements all the new developments of the Russian defense industry that are available today. Without any jumps in the "generation".

            And here is the F-35, compare the Mig-35 with the PAK-LFA fighter that could have been created. Which plane could be better?


            Turn on the brain, dear. Why are you not a MiG-35 PAK-LFA? What is missing?

            Who is the ram here, the question, in my opinion, is obvious.


            :) Personal hitting is traditionally considered a plum theme. It is counted.
      3. Alexey-74
        Alexey-74 27 December 2017 09: 27
        +3
        In the United States and Europe, the bulk of military aviation is the 4th generation aircraft. The fact that the United States launched the F-35 in a series, partially resumed production of the F-22 does not yet mean a complete replacement of the fleet .... In Russia, aviation is also mainly equipped with the 4th generation, but there are already a lot of 4 ++, and this almost the 5th generation, except for stealth technologies, which is very doubtful. In addition, Russia launches the Su-57 !!!
        1. Wayfarer
          Wayfarer 27 December 2017 19: 43
          +1
          Quote: Alexey-74
          In addition, Russia launches the Su-57 !!!
          Why did you write a comment? We are talking about the lack of a 5th generation light fighter in the Russian Federation and the fact that this is a government failure.

          There’s no one to even talk to, complete inadequacy.
      4. The comment was deleted.
      5. gig334
        gig334 27 December 2017 10: 51
        +2
        Quote: Traveler
        We have a strange situation. There everyone is rearmament on the fifth-generation fighter F-35, and we are starting mass production of the fourth-generation fighter. Seventeen years of high oil prices, and did not bother to develop and launch a fifth-generation light fighter in a series. If the MiG-35 was launched into the series twenty years ago, at least fifteen years ago, then I would be happy, but now it looks like a mockery. Only in the GDP reports is everything wonderful, the government works great. All is well beautiful marquise, all is well, all is well.

        You are not competent at all in these matters.
        F-16 V is a new American generation 4 ++ aircraft, modernized F-16. Goes into mass production for the place F-22, which is discontinued.
        You can read about the aircraft here https://topwar.ru/84987-.html
        In Europe, the main fighter of many countries is the 4+ generation Eurofighter Typhoon. The first prototypes went to the air forces of some European countries in 2003.
        1. Wayfarer
          Wayfarer 27 December 2017 19: 40
          0
          Quote: gig334
          You are not competent at all in these matters.
          You don’t understand anything at all in aviation.
  2. Grandfather
    Grandfather 26 December 2017 14: 26
    11
    Production of the MiG-35 will start from January 2018.
    Today, 14: 23
    pleasant at the end of the year ... be good .. drinks
    1. Jedi
      Jedi 26 December 2017 14: 30
      +8
      The good news, I hope for the remaining days of 2017 only these will be. And in the coming less sad and more joyful! hi
      1. Going
        Going 26 December 2017 14: 39
        +8
        Thank God, if only funding did not fail.
        1. nik13
          nik13 26 December 2017 14: 43
          +3
          the main thing is not to be pulled away, ento financing
      2. newcomer
        newcomer 26 December 2017 14: 49
        +6
        Maxim, Victor, I welcome you, good to see you. I didn’t go to VO for several days, but today it’s just a starfall of news and I don’t have time to read, not to react. here and "Gren" and MIG35, "Nakhimov", though the last couple of years to "heal" is necessary.
        1. Jedi
          Jedi 26 December 2017 14: 53
          +6
          Garik, hi buddy! hi As you can see, there is enough news, not all of them are joyful ...
          1. newcomer
            newcomer 26 December 2017 14: 58
            +3
            yes max. honestly, what’s wrong happened and is happening. on the one hand, it’s good that our VO is at least trying to alternate the negative with the positive.
            1. Going
              Going 26 December 2017 15: 12
              +5
              Hi Garik! hi life cannot be “one-color” and you won’t achieve anything without problems.
              1. newcomer
                newcomer 26 December 2017 15: 17
                +2
                yes yes, Victor, it is. but sometimes I want to know less and go more to nature.
                1. Going
                  Going 26 December 2017 15: 21
                  +5
                  So it is necessary to do and labor alternate mental - physical.
                  1. newcomer
                    newcomer 26 December 2017 15: 29
                    +2
                    there is such a chip. I often resort to it.
                    1. Going
                      Going 26 December 2017 16: 06
                      +5
                      I constantly recommend at least two hours a day of physical labor.
  3. Dezinto
    Dezinto 26 December 2017 14: 28
    +3
    I read 500 thousand and you can ride. Only somewhere to take their extra? request

    Honestly - well, what for. I'll take a look from the ground. :)))) Because this is available only to the elite.



    I’d already smeared on the wall of the cabin and died. )))
    1. Hagalaz
      Hagalaz 26 December 2017 14: 32
      0
      But NOT superfluous means there are wink hi
  4. newcomer
    newcomer 26 December 2017 14: 32
    +4
    Well, wait, pah, pah, pah.
  5. Vadim851
    Vadim851 26 December 2017 14: 32
    +1
    Maximum speed at altitude in the article of something 2100? There will be 2500-2600.
  6. q75agent
    q75agent 26 December 2017 14: 35
    +2
    AFAR will be ??? or again, "half-baked" will buy ....
    1. donavi49
      donavi49 26 December 2017 15: 17
      +5
      The first series under the contract with the Beetle-M - slotted. And on avionics quite primitive (close to the old to M / M2 and boat).
      Further they promise to upgrade but on the sides of the 20 + bookmark.
      1. abc_alex
        abc_alex 27 December 2017 00: 53
        0
        And where can I read about the contract?
  7. Herculesic
    Herculesic 26 December 2017 14: 39
    +8
    Just January 33, and begin to build, all two or three aircraft!
    1. allaykbar
      allaykbar 26 December 2017 14: 42
      +2
      although annoying comments like yours are annoying, I’ll give you a plus. You wrote this opus for the sake of this. Hold on. Just do not write this anymore

      Herculesych, if not a secret, from which country are you sitting, are you worried about Russia?
      1. Dr_engie
        Dr_engie 26 December 2017 14: 50
        0
        But seriously - how much will they buy? As much as BMP-3 / M and BTR-90?
        Buy in normal quantities - good. And if not? So, alas, it often happens.
        1. Herman 4223
          Herman 4223 28 December 2017 17: 17
          0
          There was information 24machines to 25g.
      2. Herculesic
        Herculesic 26 December 2017 17: 04
        +5
        For allaykbar, my country is Russia! And what to write or not to write to me, and it's up to me to decide! It’s just that in my 49 years I heard a lot of lies from bosses of all levels and ranks! I believe in business, not promises! They beautifully promise us, and do not fulfill their words — hence my comments with sorcasm, or sometimes frankly evil!
    2. bk316
      bk316 26 December 2017 15: 29
      +9
      You check out which Troll is not directly the Troll but the TROISCHE and the truth HERKULESYCH for 3 months 3000 comments.
      And almost all comments like "prstalipolymers" and "Soviet chips are the largest chips in the world"
      Well, are you slowing down a little there, otherwise you will pull the entire State Department wage fund onto yourself, so that Ksyusha will remain in the bulk?
      1. Herculesic
        Herculesic 26 December 2017 17: 00
        +6
        Firstly, I’m from Rostov-on-Don, secondly, I got burned on all sorts of beautiful promises, I believe only words! bk 316 -you see for yourself judge? You’re at your bazaar, you’re watching a Moscow goose, I’ve driven a couple of blows into my place with such brains! And troll, s you are, so-so a dummy that has taken a lot upon itself!
  8. Mountain shooter
    Mountain shooter 26 December 2017 14: 44
    +1
    Well, good. Great, advanced fighter. His tongue does not turn out to be easy, but much easier than Sushka.
  9. basmach
    basmach 26 December 2017 14: 48
    +1
    Well, as it was “to gain superiority over the short-range drive”, it remained. With PTB you won’t fight and if you remove them, then the short-range drive will turn out. Well, at least according to the tactics of the Air Force, airfields with front-line fighters should be located 90-100 km from the front line. But then in theory. And if you go further, then PTB is not enough.
    1. Genry
      Genry 26 December 2017 15: 06
      +2
      Is Wikipedia broken on your sofa?
      "Radius actions with normal combat load: 1000 km "
      1. basmach
        basmach 26 December 2017 19: 23
        +1
        For you, a wiki connoisseur. It is written that with 3-me PTB. You’ve seen them alive at least once. On the 29 there was one integrated fuselage per 900 liters (This car had insufficient fuel from the very beginning and, as a result, had a short flight duration. In the early versions of the aircraft there were only wing and fuselage tanks, the total reserve the fuel was equal to 4365 liters, the designers eventually solved this issue and already the 29М and 29СМТ models had an increased fuel supply inside: the first was in the influx of the wing instead of the air intake, the second was above the fuselage in the 900-liter tank, right behind the cabs th pilot, giving the aircraft a hunchbacked appearance). And here already 3. He is like a cow with them; in the event of a battle, the PTBs are discarded. Regular underwing - 850 or 1150 l. That is, its radius with additional 3 t goryachki-1000 km Without them -500-700. Taking into account patrols or air combat without PTB, even less. That’s why they called it that way .. Yes, and so as not to be unfounded, I was at the 90-9 edition in Ivano-Frankivsk at a military internship in 12 (at the school yet). There I heard a nickname. So I didn’t see him in my picture (armament), and I did a diploma in P-27. And the acquaintances on them served as one aircraft technician (on his 29 without PTB, he flew off just for a duration, and without suspension. One hour 17 min at high altitude and min speed. So after 40 min they began a quiet panic. upon arrival left 580 liters, dry) another gunsmith
        Yes, and in 93, at the celebration of the 50 anniversary of the Normandy-Niemen regiment, they twisted aerobatics, showed the bell. And before that (in a few days, the weather was a song, 25-e, and 27-e and 29-e-watched enough)
        1. Genry
          Genry 26 December 2017 22: 09
          +1
          Quote: basmach
          It is written that with 3 PTB.

          Where is it written?
          Quote: basmach
          At the 29th, there was one 900 liter liter fuselage integrated (This car had an insufficient fuel supply from the very beginning .....

          Do not write long opuses and do not pretend to not understand the difference between 29 and 35.
          In the MiG-35, first of all, they corrected the lack of internal tanks. The MiG-35’s PTBs are hung instead of weapons, up to the maximum take-off weight and are necessary for long-distance distillation. “Flight range without refueling: with a PTB of 3500 km” (Wiki ..) The new engine also added range and reduced smoke.
          1. basmach
            basmach 27 December 2017 02: 56
            +2
            Especially for you, a connoisseur of the Air Force (on the Internet). I took from the text of the article- "The range of the MiG-35 with air-to-air missiles and three outboard fuel tanks (PTB) - 1000-1400 km (depending on the composition of the armament and altitude), with shock weapons and three PTB - 800-1100 km. "
            I hope at least what is the radius of action you know.
            And further. Underwing PTB (and on 29 6 suspension points) occupy only 2 points, the remaining 4 are free and can be used for armament. But with PTB, serious restrictions are imposed on combat use. (PTB is a long cigar near 3 with thin walls, we hung four of them empty on 1150 l)
            Well, in general, from your comment, I realized that you are an amateur and all your knowledge from Wiki. And I graduated from Tambov VVAIU, faculty AB
            I have the honor
            1. Genry
              Genry 27 December 2017 14: 20
              0
              Quote: basmach
              Took from the text of the article-

              I am silent about this article because I classify it as fiction. Most of the scribblers (I’m not trying to offend normal journalistic analysts) have the opinion that they don’t need mathematics and logic. Since you are not interested in the primary sources, the conclusion suggests itself: you did not study well.
              Quote: basmach
              And further. Underwing Ptb (and at 29 6 suspension points) occupy only 2 points, the remaining 4 are free and can be used for armament.

              Yes, at least 100 free. There is a concept: maximum take-off weight, which depends on the conditions of the runway. A complete MiG-35 refueling for the stage, with 3 PTBs, is already on the verge of the most favorable take-off conditions. You can only take weapons at the expense of fuel.
              1. basmach
                basmach 27 December 2017 16: 27
                0
                Well, yes, you persistently refer to Vika. Authority. Here, yesterday, I read your comment to a friend (he was a ball technician at 29 and the head of technical link). They laughed at your knowledge.
                1. Genry
                  Genry 27 December 2017 18: 16
                  0
                  Quote: basmach
                  Well, yes, you persistently refer to Vika. Authority.

                  Wiki has a closer style to the help system, rather than retelling the OBS.
                  Quote: basmach
                  Here, yesterday, I read your comment to a friend (he is a ball technician at 29 and the head of the technical link).

                  You definitely do not distinguish between the numbers 29 and 35? You can stand the topic or you forget it or you absent-mindedly leads away? Are you laughing at everything that you cannot mentally comprehend? I need to show your comment to my friend, a specialist in psychiatry. Not for you, just an interesting case for him.
                  1. basmach
                    basmach 27 December 2017 23: 43
                    0
                    Well, yes, because it was you who served on the concrete road, prepared for flights, or did the regulations in the “mine”. "Paper" pros. And we are, 5 years in schools + service, experience and knowledge - complete bullshit.
                    1. Genry
                      Genry 28 December 2017 03: 06
                      0
                      Quote: basmach
                      And so we are, 5 years in schools + service, experience and knowledge - full poppycock.

                      Do not put your experience as a fence to new knowledge. The accumulated experience and knowledge should develop into wisdom, which allows you to receive even more new knowledge ...
        2. abc_alex
          abc_alex 27 December 2017 01: 23
          +2
          Question: where are the new MiG fuel tanks?
          Response: everywhere. :)

          As you rightly noted, an additional tank was added at SMT, and when they did the 35th, nobody "rolled back". The 35th has a practical range of about 2 thousand km. He just has 1 and two-seat modifications on a single glider. In a single room, all free space is replaced by an additional tank. I don’t know where the data in the note came from, but the developers say from 2000-2400 km without extra. tanks.

          Where does your figure about 500-600 come from? Even the 29K has a combat radius of 850 km.
          Your data from the 90th year is very important, but 27 years have passed and all this time “Migari” worked to increase the radius of the aircraft, since the market did not require a “junior partner paired with SU” but a full fighter for small countries.
          1. basmach
            basmach 27 December 2017 16: 41
            +1
            Under the combat radius is meant-flew-worked on the target-flew away. BUT 29 is primarily a front-line light fighter for air superiority (and everything else is secondary). In the case of patrolling the zone and air combat (without PTB), even 500-600 km is a lot. At the first sign of a WB, the PTB should be reset (because it seriously limits maneuverability). In the regiment for each aircraft there is only an 1 set of PTBs. Well then put that 2 + 2. Is it really not clear.
            The increase in size 35 increases drag and increases mass, ext. suspension points also give an increase, an increase in engine power (together with mass). Plus an increase in fuel supply also increases mass. And, accordingly, consumption is growing. And if you think that these are trifles and the consumption increases insignificantly, then you are mistaken. Plus, afterburner is used in any battle. And consumption instantly and seriously increases.
  10. voyaka uh
    voyaka uh 26 December 2017 14: 59
    +5
    It would be better at these plants to double the production of Su-35.
    To saturate its Air Force, and not just China to supply spare parts.
    1. newcomer
      newcomer 26 December 2017 15: 04
      +4
      We supply China with money, which will go, in addition to budgetary funds, to saturate the videoconferencing system with dryers. MIG 35 is a completely different story, not only not interfering with the SU35, but also complementing it.
    2. Kasym
      Kasym 26 December 2017 15: 23
      +5
      So different cars for tasks.
      There is still not enough money to rearm all Sukhoi 35S fighter aircraft. And it’s hard to make money on it - for many, especially small countries, such a fighter is redundant. Therefore, the MiG-35 will have greater commercial success. I consider, for example, that migraine is now more necessary for Kazakhstan. hi
      1. newcomer
        newcomer 26 December 2017 15: 27
        +2
        in fact of the matter. completely different cars. and forever the production of one is contrasted with the other.
        1. voyaka uh
          voyaka uh 26 December 2017 15: 33
          +3
          And what is different about them? :
          1) both are twin-engine fighters.
          2) both are high-speed
          3) both are super-inverted.
          4) both - can conduct an air battle.
          MiG is actually a small copy of Su. Or vice versa.
          1. newcomer
            newcomer 26 December 2017 15: 42
            +3
            very primitive. especially the last point of your comparison. (especially point 4: fighters “know how to conduct an air battle“. regarding the “reduced copy“, you know the history of the creation of both gliders. This is purely from Odessa, but to talk. Do you know the difference between heavy and light fighters?
          2. Kasym
            Kasym 26 December 2017 15: 44
            +5
            Have you seen the work of the MiG-29 (35) on the ground? I have seen.
            Su-35S is a pure fighter for gaining air supremacy. MiG is more intended to support infantry on the ground and its cover - for that it is front-line. hi
            See the experience of Syria. Su-35S more escorted and patrolled.
            1. newcomer
              newcomer 26 December 2017 15: 50
              +2
              about SU / MIG35x_ well, let's say partly you're right. but Sushka knows how to work on the ground. MIG is intended (even in the wording: front-line) to break through / destroy enemy air defenses to the tactical depth of enemy troops. but as we know 29e worked at the interception too.
              1. Kasym
                Kasym 26 December 2017 15: 57
                +1
                I agree. But for bombing, a lightweight machine is better, which is easier to tighten when diving onto a target. That is, the accuracy is higher. On the Su-35S, the error (scatter) during such use will be much greater. And since the car is much larger, it’s easier to get out of the receiver.
                The WAF wrote that the discharge of AB goes on Sushki practically "by eye, by nose." There is no such equipment there for such tasks, especially on the Su-35S. There is equipment for missiles in-in the database and from class X (I could be wrong). hi
                And look at the range. Su can be sent to the rear of the enemy, MiG is not desirable.
                1. voyaka uh
                  voyaka uh 26 December 2017 16: 07
                  +4
                  What in the 21st century DIVE on the target ??? 2nd World or what?
                  In Syria, VKS dive on target?
                  From 5 km with an aiming container (or Hephaestus, at worst), without changing course and speed,
                  launch accurate bombs and all things. And the more of them (bombs), the better.
                  So as not to come back a second time.
                  1. newcomer
                    newcomer 26 December 2017 16: 24
                    +2
                    voyaka uh, you described the performance characteristics of the SU34_ fighter bomber base rocket / bombing, but it can also stand up for itself. 35SU / MIG fighters_ the basis of air combat, but it can also hit the ground. do you feel the difference? I intentionally set out in plain language, I do not like enviable phrases.
                    1. voyaka uh
                      voyaka uh 26 December 2017 16: 35
                      +2
                      "the base is an air battle, but it can also hit the ground. Do you feel the difference?" ///

                      DO NOT FEEL. You described a fighter-bomber. Everything modern that is now being released in the world (that of the 4th, that of the 5th generation) -
                      fighter-bombers.
                      Some more fighters, others more bombers.
                      1. newcomer
                        newcomer 26 December 2017 16: 42
                        +1
                        that is all salt. You do not see the difference between SU ​​35 and 34? not well, of course we don’t push the unshifted into one glider like f35, and thank God, probably.
                  2. basmach
                    basmach 26 December 2017 19: 14
                    +3
                    The easiest. With 5 km (the so-called "navigation bombing"), it is possible only if there are "Stingers", "Arrows", and "Needles" from the air defense system. I already wrote that I served as an engineer of PrNK-54 on Su-17М4. So, while performing a missile defense, for some time the plane flies in a straight line without maneuver (until the system drops the missile defense), an ideal target. In modern conditions, a shallow dive-15-20 degrees is used. (By the way, we had the main mode — both bombing and LDCs and a cannon), And also there is bombing from the cabrio (from a gentle one with aiming at a given point (the angle of cabrio to 45, if it doesn’t change memory) or steep with aiming at a target (with an angle of 90). These 2 modes allow you to work from extremely low altitudes. There is also a horizontal flight mode (as an option for a hollow dive), but for low altitudes you need AB with TP ( OFAB-250Ш) and with a corresponding deceleration on chopper.
                    Well, in the "Stucks" or Pe-2 version, yes, an anachronism.
                    And yet, for LGSN need backlight. If there is no gunner, you need to highlight the onboard LD. Although not for long, but also in a straight line.
                    1. Kasym
                      Kasym 26 December 2017 19: 46
                      +1
                      Thank you, Basmach (my army nickname wink ) for clarification, like a pro. They are all high. destroy targets with missiles - you won’t save enough money. They would still try to destroy targets with AP during horizontal flight. By the way, working with a cannon on the ground was a mandatory exercise for pilots. hi
            2. voyaka uh
              voyaka uh 26 December 2017 15: 56
              +2
              "Have you seen the work of the MiG-29 (35) on the ground? I saw.
              Su-35S pure fighter for gaining air supremacy "///

              To be honest, I was sure the opposite. belay
              The heavier (more powerful) the fighter, the greater its bomb capacity.
              Su can take bombs (VZ missiles) much more than MiGs. Him and work
              on the ground. God himself commanded.
              And MiG, naturally, for air combat. Since the earth he has nothing to work.
              1. Kasym
                Kasym 26 December 2017 16: 01
                +1
                Warrior, wrong. Study the question. Su-35S has equipment for long-range missiles. The MiG-29 does not. The Su-35S can also carry class X missiles, the MiG-29 could not do this at all. The MiG-29 doesn’t even have such a radar. There is only an OLS (optical-location station). hi
                Look what the FRONT fighter means.
              2. newcomer
                newcomer 26 December 2017 16: 06
                +3
                colleagues, you are like children. all kinds of formulations can confuse oneself. Yes, both of them can work on the ground. but these are fighters. SU_ heavy, expensive, with a greater payload, with a large radius of work to gain superiority in the air. MIG_ is a front-line fighter of gaining superiority in the air at tactical depth, together with work on air defense, etc. In short, MIG is easier, cheaper.
            3. Ryazan87
              Ryazan87 26 December 2017 16: 08
              0
              Those. need to produce a separate type of "light" (actually not very), "cheap" (also not) fighter to "support infantry" ?? Original. Maybe the Su-34 will do better, no?
              The MiG-29s on the ground were tried by Ukrainians in August 2014, not from a good life. Guess how it ended.
              1. newcomer
                newcomer 26 December 2017 16: 13
                +1
                for what you say we have army aviation and a front-line bomber.
                1. Ryazan87
                  Ryazan87 26 December 2017 16: 50
                  0
                  Exactly. Well, to hell with it, is it necessary, the 35th?
                  “MIG is easier, cheaper” - these are the parameters that are in doubt now.
                  Yes, even in the presence of the Su-30.
                  In my opinion, the MiG-35 does not need the VKS from the word at all.
                  1. newcomer
                    newcomer 26 December 2017 17: 53
                    +1
                    I wanted to state an idea, but the NEXUS colleague outlined everything well, read, interesting.
              2. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 26 December 2017 16: 18
                +7
                Russia is a rich country. Richer than America, judging by the decision on the MiG-35.
                Issue SIMULTANEOUS 4 types of fighter: Su-30, Su-35, Su-57 and MiG-35.
                Everyone is at a little factory. And a single assembly (due to a non-rubber budget).
                Instead of producing just one type, but at 2-3 large plants in parallel.
                And really strain, make this one type: 1) AFAR 2) sighting container ... all modern gadgets
                1. newcomer
                  newcomer 26 December 2017 16: 37
                  +2
                  voyaka uh, we supply the Air Fleet with several types, since the life of enterprises in the literal sense depends on this. some city-forming. I think so.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 26 December 2017 16: 48
                    0
                    This is the reason I believe. To keep people busy with something.
                    But on the other hand, what difference does it make to these people what to collect:
                    the same thing at 4 plants or different types?
                    1. newcomer
                      newcomer 26 December 2017 17: 11
                      +1
                      Well, you’re just like at Privoz in Odesa, of course. here the question is the readiness of the Moscow Region to buy expensive 35. it is impossible to saturate the VKS with expensive cars completely, and is it worth it. The Sparky30th has its own niche and its own tasks. As I see it, 30 is more fond of naval aviation. Yes, and some series need to be put into service, so that the client “pecked”.
                  2. ZVO
                    ZVO 26 December 2017 17: 33
                    0
                    Quote: newbie
                    voyaka uh, we supply the Air Fleet with several types, since the life of enterprises in the literal sense depends on this. some city-forming. I think so.


                    What prevents the unification of assembly production?
                    And what city-forming enterprises are used in the production of fighter aircraft?
                    IAP - 12000 people.
                    Given the members of their families, and their businesses. firms. stores, their staff, their family members, etc. - a natural interest in this particular location of the plant is 50-60 thousand people.
                    The population of Irkutsk is 600000 people, i.e. ten times more.
                    Those. We understand that there is no city-forming dependence.
                    With Komsomolsk-on-Amur - a bit like a city-forming, but still .. 5 times the difference.
                    Lytkarino? Generally funny. Moscow, it is Moscow. with her 20 real millions.
                    Who else?
                    No one ...
                    1. newcomer
                      newcomer 26 December 2017 17: 50
                      +2
                      a very serious and erroneous conclusion. Do you understand that there is no time to readjust the line of the “machine tool” and retrain the techies? these two models 30 and 35 are different not only glider.
                      1. ZVO
                        ZVO 26 December 2017 18: 38
                        +1
                        Quote: newbie
                        a very serious and erroneous conclusion. Do you understand that there is no time to readjust the line of the “machine tool” and retrain the techies? these two models 30 and 35 are different not only glider.


                        Do we need 4 different plants, fighter, full cycle?
                        2 is not enough?
                        Precisely assembly?
                        And for the rest of the enterprises - do you need a full cycle?
                        Why Samara Hydroautomatics (Technodynamics) spanks its chassis and spanks.
                        Maybe she also wants to become an assembly plant? Full cycle. so that all of its landing gears are put on airplanes .. Her own airplanes, which she made?

                        That everyone could make airplanes. but the trouble is. each plant is not capable of making more than 20 aircraft ...

                        Could it be easier to develop unification?
                        And it’s not at all about changing the machines ...
                        Where and what kind of machines did you intend to readjust in the aircraft assembly industry?
                        Change conductor and slipway? Case 2 days.
                        Look at the factories of Airbus and Boeing.
                        Perfect management. Therefore, then the whole world can crush for themselves ..
                        What technology can do.
                        From the first start of metal cutting to the release of the fully finished 373 Boeing, 11 days elapse ...
                        This is called production management.
                        Why can they afford distributed airframe production in parts, and we cannot?

                        I remember very well how the Tu-154 and Tu-95 were made at the 18th aircraft factory.
                        No matter how long ago, but since then the technology has stepped so far. if you don’t know ... Any computer control there ...
                      2. newcomer
                        newcomer 26 December 2017 18: 54
                        +2
                        uh, how much interesting you wrote. from the very beginning the word “machine” is in quotation marks, what does it mean? a landing gear factory cannot produce airplanes without loss of time and finances. our aircraft factories are gradually switching to parallel production of civilian vessels. Over time, they will be devastated to civilian production. Well, a comparison with Boeing and Airbus is at least incorrect: over the past 30 years we have lost not only production, but also the ship market. Boeing “grabbed” our niches. give time to competent people, everything will gradually improve. I think I answered the main idea.
              3. Kasym
                Kasym 26 December 2017 16: 22
                +1
                Friends. Initially, the Su-27 AT ALL could not work on the ground. Its task is to remove from the air any target, incl. KR, bombers, etc. MiG-29 could initially use NARs and AB. His task is to cover the troops on the ground and help them with their ammunition. That's exactly what he can dive at ground targets. This I observed at the airship for 2 years. It is more versatile. His weaknesses were that there was no radar (how to induce cancer. In long range), a small radius, and resources were lower. The MiG-35 solves these problems (but the radius is still smaller than Sushki). Look at the speed of the MiG-35 and Su-35 - I think a lot will tell.
                The Su-34 has more bomber bombs and there is all the equipment for this, the Su-35S does not. Run the pros on the site. hi
                1. newcomer
                  newcomer 26 December 2017 16: 29
                  +1
                  Kasym, so am I about the same. maybe in other words, but the same thing. and offend, Kasym, any interlocutor is interesting to me.
                  1. Kasym
                    Kasym 26 December 2017 16: 45
                    +3
                    Newbie. I have no intention of hurting anyone, buddy. It's just that I have been following the MiG-29 and its upgraded versions for a long time. We, in the Republic of Kazakhstan, delivered the Su-30SM against the MiG-29 in a training battle. MiG-29 in one gate. He is less. Weight is less. Which is easier to deploy: a jeep or a passenger car? Of course, if we exclude OBT. And if you stick it on the MiG-29, then ... Su is a loser.
                    It is unfortunate that the pros very rarely go to the site. There used to be more. VAF flew on the MiG-29. I, arguing with fellow countrymen who claimed that he had already become an anachronism, asked for his comments. ... "It depends on what tasks you need a fighter for. If it’s on the ground, then there’s nothing better for the MiG-29. Rafal will give in to melee combat. Although he is a worthy opponent, but the price is sky-high. For one Rafal 2-3 MiG-29, who’ll just kill him. " hi
                    Once again about the weaknesses of the MiG-29. Radius, radar (avionics) and low resources (500 hours per engine). Now look at the data in this article and others on the MiG-35. AFAR BEETLE, engine resources increased significantly, range increased.
                    Even at the air training ground (87-89) Flight Leaders with the rank of Colonels spoke for the difference between Su and MiG. What can I add to me, a tablet player and a radio mechanic, a simple soldier - so I say that everyone can explain the pros, especially since they flew on it. They wrote it to me earlier. hi
                    Sorry if somewhere "hurt".
                    1. newcomer
                      newcomer 26 December 2017 17: 00
                      +2
                      colleague, all in a bundle, do not apologize. I, too, am not a pro, but I like 29 since childhood, the middle brother instilled in me a love for 29. I have been following the rehearsals for a long time, and what a bummer with MIG29OVT_ they killed a guy, devils. but 35, I really hope it will be with full forcemeat. there is an opinion that it was MIG29 that was supposed to meet the enemy’s mosquito aerial attack, and after them Sushki should join the battle. I think this makes sense.
      2. ghby
        ghby 26 December 2017 19: 56
        0
        Quote: Kasym
        Therefore, the MiG-35 will have greater commercial success. I consider, for example, that migraine is now more necessary for Kazakhstan.

        Kazakhstan has 31st. And in my region, there is nothing. What is it for? wink
    3. Ustin
      Ustin 26 December 2017 16: 18
      0
      Quote: voyaka uh
      It would be better at these plants to double the production of Su-35.
      To saturate its Air Force, and not just China to supply spare parts.

      It would be better to triple the number of flight personnel. Yes engineering and technical. Help? Then we could talk about materiel "in an adult way".
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 December 2017 16: 27
        0
        "... would triple the number of flight personnel ... Help?" ////

        Triple? In terms of children are not enough? I don’t know ... the forces are not the same. recourse
        I can still conceive two or three sons ...
        1. Kasym
          Kasym 26 December 2017 16: 51
          +1
          The warrior, the fact of the matter is that NARROW SPECIALIZED BATTLE PLANES are better than generalists. That F-35. Try to drag in such a number of equipment. As an example. Su-24. Look at the ammunition nomenclature (over 30). EACH TYPE HAS ITS SIGHTING EQUIPMENT. And how to stick it all in one car? That is why the Su-24 was brought to mind for a very long time and taught to fly on the ultra-small - hence there were so many emergency situations with it. But then, as he showed himself, the Su-34 is still resting. hi
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 December 2017 17: 04
            +2
            "EACH TYPE HAS ITS SIGHTING EQUIPMENT.
            And how to stick it all in one car? "////

            This is HORRIBLE. It should be vice versa: for all types of weapons
            ONE sighting equipment.
            And all this is stuck in ONE car: "Fat Penguin" laughing F-35, which you despise so much. He will shoot (and hit) any missile, any manufacturer
            after minimal grinding of a piece of software and suspension tools.
    4. NEXUS
      NEXUS 26 December 2017 17: 00
      +3
      Quote: voyaka uh
      It would be better at these plants to double the production of Su-35.

      What for? We have a clear quantitative bias towards heavy MFIs against medium and light ones. MIG-35, as a temporary measure is needed, as the SU-35 was needed at one time. They will run technology, arsenal, radar, etc. on the MIG, and on its basis it will be possible to build an average MFI of generation 5. Our flyers who fly on the 29th should soon be transferred to the MIG-35.
      AFAR Beetle will be finalized, and by the year 20 ROFAR will appear. In fact, the MIG-35 is needed, but with an optimized price. Now, it is not much less than the price of a heavy SU-35, which is not good. But, I think, with an increase in the series, the price will decrease.
      1. voyaka uh
        voyaka uh 26 December 2017 17: 22
        +2
        Will not work. Financially. In 2017, the Reserve Fund ended. He is not there.
        Welfare (pension) remained - another two or three years.
        If Russia wants to keep the Air Force, then it’s necessary to reduce
        focus on the most necessary and promising models.
        They are: Su-35 and Su-57. The rest is nafig. And the absurd Su-34 armored car - nafig.
        But these two can be "licked" with all the modern twists. And take them the same
        factories that rivet it is not clear what.
        Then, when the recession ends someday, there will be no obsolete, unified air forces.
        1. NEXUS
          NEXUS 26 December 2017 17: 28
          +4
          Quote: voyaka uh
          Will not work. Financially. In 2017, the Reserve Fund ended. He is not there.
          Welfare (pension) remained - another two or three years.
          If Russia wants to keep the Air Force, then it’s necessary to reduce

          I am always touched by such statements about “no money” and that the Russian Federation is a very poor and weak country. Dear, you are talking about the richest country in the world, and not about Honduras. Wake up and do not write more such nonsense.
          Quote: voyaka uh
          They are: Su-35 and Su-57. The rest is nafig. And the absurd Su-34 armored car - nafig.

          The SU-30 will be the next 5 years and will remain the main heavy MFI. After the SU-35S will go. Moreover, the 35th still improve and improve both in the arsenal, and in the radar and electronic warfare systems.
          According to the 34th ... our VKS needs no more than 300 pieces. Larger, this is redundant. Why? Therefore, they are developing a new attack aircraft in full, to update the park of the 25th. And the tasks that the 34th performs well overlap with both 30th and 35th and will be blocked by new attack aircraft.
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 December 2017 17: 53
            +2
            "Dear, you are talking about the richest country in the world" ///

            ABOUT! with such a wonderful premise, nothing is scary:
            You can produce 10 types of fighters. Reckless.
            ... success! fellow
            1. NEXUS
              NEXUS 26 December 2017 17: 59
              +2
              Quote: voyaka uh
              "Dear, you are talking about the richest country in the world" ///

              ABOUT! with such a wonderful premise, nothing is scary:
              You can produce 10 types of fighters. Reckless.
              ... success! fellow

              You would have success in mastering the F-35 and further disappointment in them. And we will sort things out with 10 types, don’t worry.
              1. ZVO
                ZVO 26 December 2017 18: 40
                +3
                Quote: NEXUS

                You would have success in mastering the F-35 and further disappointment in them. And we will sort things out with 10 types, don’t worry.


                I would not jerk and enjoy the 10 types. The warrior is absolutely right.
                Spraying on supposedly "narrow specialists" - never leads to real benefits.
                1. Kasym
                  Kasym 26 December 2017 19: 18
                  +1
                  The warrior is absolutely wrong. The real good - see Syria.
                  F-35, as an example. Yields:
                  1. As an attack aircraft - Thunderbol.
                  2. As a fighter - F-16, 18,15 in speed and maneuverability.
                  3. Bomber - with 4 suspension points in the internal compartments, it is not. 2 AB and 2 missiles.
                  This station wagon is a spray of funds. hi
                2. NEXUS
                  NEXUS 26 December 2017 19: 23
                  +2
                  Quote: ZVO
                  I would not jerk and enjoy the 10 types. The warrior is absolutely right.

                  And I don’t jerk ... 90th years to us here so are audible. And there were two ways: either continue to fly to the 27th and 29th, heroically modifying them (not deeply) and wait for the SU-57th, or build new IFIs and slowly bring the SU-57 to mind. The second way for me is more successful and more logical. Therefore, the line was stretched. Logically, the 30s should slowly be transferred to export, and the SU-35S will become the main heavy IFI. It will take 10 years before the SU-57 is finalized, tested, even modernized, and made the main heavy IFI VKS. At the same time, all, all this time, our flyers need to fly something?
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 27 December 2017 11: 34
                    +4
                    "90 years, we like this like that." ////

                    The 90s were 18 years ago. During this time, China from a mediocre country
                    turn into a superpower. South Korea has become a technology giant.
                    Interestingly, in the 90s another 50 years in Russia will be blamed for all the failures?
                    1. ZVO
                      ZVO 27 December 2017 15: 07
                      +3
                      Quote: voyaka uh
                      Interestingly, in the 90s another 50 years in Russia will be blamed for all the failures?


                      We have an example of Abkhazia.
                      Where 25 years no one tried to restore the destroyed country.
                      And there will not be another 50 years.
                      From the word "Generally!" ...
                      And they themselves do not and do not give others.
                      Shepherds in one word ...
        2. newcomer
          newcomer 26 December 2017 17: 31
          +1
          “Concentrate on the main thing”, let alone “shrink” the adversary does not give us, so do not worry, with you. and stop burying us, the shovel will break. Yes, and in the plans of the Ministry of Defense, gradually, as before, four types of fighters: MIG / SU35e, LFI MIG and SU57.
          1. NEXUS
            NEXUS 26 December 2017 18: 00
            +2
            Quote: newbie
            LFI MIG and SU57.

            There is no longer LFI as a class. All light fighters have switched to the medium class and the MIG-35 is no exception.
            1. newcomer
              newcomer 26 December 2017 18: 04
              +2
              I hope composite LFI will be easier than the five on the basis of the 35th, which they want to do with the Arabs.
              1. NEXUS
                NEXUS 26 December 2017 18: 13
                +3
                Quote: newbie
                I hope composite LFI will be easier than the five on the basis of the 35th, which they want to do with the Arabs.

                It won’t turn out to be ... fighter jets have become more complicated, multifunctionality has been added, that is, work for different purposes, again the same arsenal has changed, etc. ... the new average generation 5 MFIs will not be easier than the 35th, even taking into account composites. Multifunctionality and the emergence of new threats add a lot of weight to fighters.
                1. newcomer
                  newcomer 26 December 2017 18: 17
                  +1
                  I hope ours will be a fighter, and not a low-speed bomber attack aircraft, such as f35.
                  1. NEXUS
                    NEXUS 26 December 2017 18: 19
                    +2
                    Quote: newbie
                    I hope ours will be a fighter, and not a low-speed bomber attack aircraft, such as f35.

                    A new attack aircraft is being developed separately ... the new fighter will be the fighter.
                    1. newcomer
                      newcomer 26 December 2017 18: 28
                      +2
                      NEXUS I am in the know. haven’t you caught the irony?
                      1. NEXUS
                        NEXUS 26 December 2017 18: 29
                        +3
                        Quote: newbie
                        NEXUS I am in the know. haven’t you caught the irony?

                        I realized that this is a brick in the garden of my Israeli opponent ...
                      2. newcomer
                        newcomer 26 December 2017 18: 37
                        +2
                        Well, yes.
            2. ZVO
              ZVO 26 December 2017 18: 41
              +1
              Quote: NEXUS
              Quote: newbie
              LFI MIG and SU57.

              There is no longer LFI as a class. All light fighters have switched to the medium class and the MIG-35 is no exception.


              Well, I bet.

              Grippen is a luxury plane.
              But like everything Swedish has no market share ...
              Therefore, it is forgotten. For no good reason. undeservedly.
              1. newcomer
                newcomer 26 December 2017 18: 57
                +1
                yes argue, who's stopping you? flu_ yes good. are there few good and beautiful people in the world? but against 29СМТ or ОВТ, it’s nothing.
        3. Kasym
          Kasym 26 December 2017 19: 04
          +1
          Warrior, they wrote a complete absurdity. According to your Su-35 and Su-57 which has a purpose and see the experience of Syria. Forged victory front-line aviation and bombers. They promoted infantry and helped take settlements. Su-24, 25, 30CM, 34; Tu-95 helicopters with work on the ground. For the Su-35 and 57, virtually no work, due to the lack of air targets. How to create one sight for bombs and missiles - complete nonsense ?! For AB, you need to know the direction of the wind, humidity, density, altitude of the target, etc. .. For missiles you need to "capture and track" the target (laser, radar, thermal). If you don’t see the difference, then you can continue to not have a discussion. hi
          1. voyaka uh
            voyaka uh 26 December 2017 19: 26
            +1
            "For AB, you need to know the direction of the wind, humidity, density, altitude of the target, etc." ///

            Do not need anything! You are stuck in WWII.
            It is necessary that the bomb had a GOS and wings with control from the GOS.
            And highlight the target from the plane.
            This is what modern bombs look like:
            These are not missiles, namely bombs.
            1. Kasym
              Kasym 26 December 2017 19: 54
              +2
              And how much does this “miracle” cost, didn’t think about what purpose? It is necessary and there is, but sometimes the goal is cheaper. And APs and NARs, like you, are also 5km away. Will you bullet when Katyusha is needed or one 30-mm shell? Or when you need one massive blow to an extended target (BTT column, trench with a blind. Kilometer long). All that painted for a single, stationary purpose. Sorry, but there is no desire to argue.
              Well, at least they understood the difference between a front-line fighter and a heavy one. hi
              In Syria, Hephaestus sometimes replaced all this expensive, high-precision nomenclature. Better one such sight with cheap AB sometimes than what you painted. Why don’t you promote your super universal F_35. laughing
              1. Rushnairfors
                Rushnairfors 26 December 2017 20: 42
                +3
                And sometimes it didn’t replace. And then the leader and the slave, working on a signal providing 24 bombs, neatly stacked 300 meters to the target. 24 ofab 250-270 !!!! And to hell with them, I’m not sorry, but the task has not been completed. So Hephaestus is not such a super-duper analogue system in the world (or rather, a subsystem).
                1. Kasym
                  Kasym 26 December 2017 20: 47
                  +2
                  No need to juggle. You want to say that you need to destroy everything with high precision? This was discussed !!! I think that for each task its own ammunition! That’s all. Or let’s remove the guns, simple scrap batteries with the NARs - so what? This is stupid - what do you think !? Even staff members have no budget !!!
                  See how Mosul, along with civilians, was razed to the ground - where are their precision weapons !?
                  1. Rushnairfors
                    Rushnairfors 27 December 2017 03: 48
                    +1
                    No, I don’t think so. I just described one of the many cases when Hephaestus did not justify himself, in fairness I note that often it depends more on aircraft equipment, for example, the TsVM-45 of the so-called “machine” of the brain of our NK45
                    1. Kasym
                      Kasym 27 December 2017 16: 43
                      +2
                      Afghan. The beginning of the century. In a prisoner of war camp near Dostum, the Taliban rebelled and barricaded themselves in the basement of one of the premises. Shtatnikov called up a bomber with precision weapons and laser-guided. Caused by American operators from the ground. Three bombs and three ... misses. Then they just flooded the basement ... There was still an American citizen (white) among the Taliban. After a while, all the videos were deleted.
                      You continue such incidents ... Still, a lot depends on the person and the quality of this equipment ... So let's not ... I repeat. For each goal, its own ammunition ... And look at the komenta of the Warriors, he does not even see the difference between the front and the heavy fighter. Not understanding why you rushed to defend his opinion.
                      Once I argued with the pilot here. It's about the MiG-31. I wrote that he is tit.-steel, because dural. cannot withstand speeds greater than 2,5M, which is necessary for a successful interception. And he ... is popper ... that he asked to transfer the argument to the PM. hi
                      1. Rushnairfors
                        Rushnairfors 27 December 2017 17: 19
                        +3
                        I do not defend him, but to be honest I believe that the proportion of guided weapons should prevail in the modern army. Yes, it is more expensive but also more effective, much more effective than any hephaestus.
    5. abc_alex
      abc_alex 27 December 2017 00: 56
      +1
      Impossible. It is simply financially impossible to rearm our Air Force in full in full. Even the United States can’t afford such a foolish thing (all the Air Force on heavy fighters), where can we go.
      And why?
  11. q75agent
    q75agent 26 December 2017 15: 22
    +1
    Quote: donavi49
    The first series under the contract with the Beetle-M - slotted. And on avionics quite primitive (close to the old to M / M2 and boat).
    Further they promise to upgrade but on the sides of the 20 + bookmark.

    it is clear ... again there is not enough money, the cost of each radar will be $ 3,5-4 million
    1. ZVO
      ZVO 26 December 2017 17: 36
      0
      Quote: q75agent
      Quote: donavi49
      The first series under the contract with the Beetle-M - slotted. And on avionics quite primitive (close to the old to M / M2 and boat).
      Further they promise to upgrade but on the sides of the 20 + bookmark.

      it is clear ... again there is not enough money, the cost of each radar will be $ 3,5-4 million


      I think that at least 2 times more ...
  12. Ryazan87
    Ryazan87 26 December 2017 17: 10
    +1
    “That's why the Su-24 was brought to mind for a very long time and taught to fly on the ultra-small - hence there were so many emergency situations with it. But then, as it showed itself, the Su-34 is still resting. hi[/ quote] "
    It became really interesting how did the Su-24 show itself? A capricious, complex aircraft with a high accident rate (only for the period 1988-1992, 27 aircraft crashed!). Actively used in Chechnya and Syria, i.e. in the absence of an enemy full air defense. Currently obsolete - by 2020 they are going to withdraw from armament.
    1. Rushnairfors
      Rushnairfors 26 December 2017 19: 04
      +3
      And then in Chechnya it was used due to the lack of more advanced technology. Back in the 1st Chechen regret bitterly regretted that moment 27 and su17m4 sent for scrapping. Altogether, except for Su24 and Su25, no planes were actively used anymore in either the 1st or 2nd Chechen. Tu22m3 were used periodically, but mostly at night the SABs hung up, I know that during the 2nd war there were several Su30 sorties, the testers experienced something. Actually everything. In general, you are right, the "small" Su24 is considered a very complex and capricious aircraft.
      1. Evil543
        Evil543 26 December 2017 21: 21
        +1
        In 96 rooks were applied, I saw more than once, but once they themselves barely washed away from them, professional runners would be envious.
    2. Kasym
      Kasym 26 December 2017 19: 31
      +2
      Why then was he dragged to Syria if there is a Su-34? Have not you thought? Su-24 is able to fly taking into account the envelope of the terrain on autopilot - there is no Su-34. The nomenclature of ammunition and Hephaestus - the Su-34 does not. Take off when the Su-34 will teach all this. Can you name at least one emergency with Su-24 in Syria? The blood of our pilots was a board to teach the Su-24 a lot. How to create software for autopilot flying on the smallest - after all, you must first manually act in order to know how the plane behaves at such altitudes and modes — this is for you both the disaster and the lives of our pilots. Read the flyers comments on the site.
      Georgia in 2008 We rushed for the MiG-27K, in which Kayra stood - do you know what it is !? But it was written off and nothing could be put on the wing. I had to drag the Tu-22 under air defense strikes. Here the pilots all chewed - because of our amateurism, they almost all washed off. Full nonsense written. hi
      Flying at low altitudes is almost impossible to detect. Have you ever seen how a radar works?
      1. Rushnairfors
        Rushnairfors 26 December 2017 20: 06
        +3
        At least 3ChP, in 2015 they rolled out due to brake failure during landing, in 2016 engine failure after taking off 2017 took off on the wing 69 - both died.
        Regarding the regime of enveloping the terrain, did they fly there at low altitudes? Even Su25 was forbidden to work below 4000m at one time - the men were surprised: if the exit from the attack using the NARG is lower than 4km, then how long should you enter? And most importantly - how to detect a target from such heights? Su 24 below 4000m they don’t work there - it’s iron, I know for sure. So the SPS there is like a saddle to a cow.
        Regarding SVP24- on su34 there is a system not inferior to hephaestus. And by the way, from the experience of operating this miracle on the Tu22m3, this is far from a super system. The accuracy of combat use is undeniably higher, but there are blunders in the same Syria - there were 300 meters shortfalls, although sooner believe Konashenkov
        Well, about Georgia and tu22m3- being a young lieutenant on the right cup tu22m3 had to drive a couple of times "for the ribbon", they worked correctly, the goals were set in accordance with the destination, what's the problem and where did I write stupid things?
        1. Rushnairfors
          Rushnairfors 26 December 2017 20: 08
          +1
          How does the radar work, then what?
          1. Kasym
            Kasym 26 December 2017 20: 42
            +2
            He wrote to Ryazan, because he answered my writings. I didn’t see your answer.
            About the radar. On small it’s difficult to detect.
            Why did they chase the Su-24 when there is a Su-34? The VAF justified the Su-34 as "damp" compared to the Su-24. hi
            1. Rushnairfors
              Rushnairfors 26 December 2017 21: 08
              +3
              Kasym, what do you think? Dampness is one of the reasons, but considering that at the time of the start of the operation in Syria, the aircraft "operated in the old fashioned way", they did a good job there. Problems began when they began to use (and experience, by the way) the WTO.
              Let's talk further. As of October 2015, only 2 airbases were re-equipped with Su34 (Morozovsk and Voronezh), then, in my opinion, the first 2-3 ships left, I do not remember, I'm sorry. That is, the equipment is new, the flight and engineering staff in full may have not yet mastered it. And there are so many sou24 !!! After all, they were not written off after the rearmament of these regiments. Distributed to the rest. It’s a pity to write off a rod and a rod, Syria is an excellent place and resource to finish off and patter world terrorism. Vaughn and Assad threw 34 or 6 sides.
              We are going further. The military leadership has repeatedly stated that it is necessary to drive as many flight personnel as possible through Syria. And it is right. But if the same Su34 is relocated to Khmeimim as the main strike force, then how and on what to gain experience from the same naval aviation? (Chernyakhovsk, Monchegorsk and Guards, all for Su24), and here is another reason drew up. Well, again, the war in Syria is a war with bandits nevertheless and not with the regular army of a foreign state. For our part, it would be foolish to use new aircraft on such a scale against bandits, especially since the resource there is killed mercilessly, with 5-6 flights per day every day. It’s better to ditch this training resource. We allocated 2-3 sides from each regiment and all is well. Almost a whole nuclear power plant in Syria is bombed, fired, factory workers eliminate jambs, the same topic is about su30cm and su35s. By the way !!!! After Su34 they began to involve in attacking SC and Su30- it turned out that they work better than Su34 on the ground !!! But the most amazing thing was that he gave them both. A friend was at su35 there, he said that already in 25, the most complex goals were fulfilled by su2017. Here you have the fighter. Su35 plugged in a belt.
              1. Kasym
                Kasym 26 December 2017 22: 14
                +1
                You know better. But why drag the crews into old cars - they will be written off !? But the difference is big. Su-34 can not be called a continuation of the Su-24, the basis is still the Su-27go. Therefore, piloting is different.
                So with the Su-35, everything is clear - the most advanced avionics with Irbis, which are needed for high-precision ammunition. But how to work with such an expensive machine NARS, AP and AB on the ground? He would have to compete with the F-22, and not work with "iron".
                I think the reason is simple - it was time to dispose of the depots with old ammunition. Check in practice all the achievements of the Su-24, in order to know the direction of modernization of the Su-34, which is obviously new. Well, if staff members began to actively oppose, then those flights at low altitudes would be very useful. Do not forget the advertisement - any wish for your money.
                I do not agree on the resources. After all, this also needs to be checked during intensive flights. A new machine can always throw an unpredictable “fortel”, and the Su-24 is already satisfied with a reliable and proven machine - how many have already flown on it. That is, I want to say on the example of AK reliability - this is important in war. Can use the entire range of old ammunition.
                The front bomber is a very expensive car, a lot of all kinds of equipment. And then I agree that the Su-34 is a pity. It is more versatile, and can cling to a fighter.
                Maybe they’ll want to push the Su-24 where they want to - if there is anyone who needs a front-line bomber at affordable prices. To China or India, where with such airplanes it’s not so easy to send to a landfill. Even just the documentation. After all, what a hell of an advertisement it turned out - the Yankees are resting. "The Russian third-fourth generation wipes the fourth-fifth state."
                I do not argue that the Su-24 is outdated. But at the same time, the Su-34 still needs to be finished, like any new one. And it's not just one year.
                Similarly for fighters: the old Su-27 and the new Su-35 were driven together. How many 27 flew, and how many Su-35, which a couple of months, as adopted. hi
              2. voyaka uh
                voyaka uh 26 December 2017 22: 36
                0
                "to engage in attacking the SC and su30- it turned out that they work better on the ground than su34 !!! But the most amazing thing is that su35 did both of them" ////

                Confirmation of my posts. Su-34 is an extra car, not to mention the Su-24.
                They rule around the world fighter-bomber.
                1. abc_alex
                  abc_alex 27 December 2017 01: 50
                  +1
                  Well, why are you writing this?
                  In addition to the F-16, the U.S. Air Force is operating F-111 with might and main. And in Iraq, they flew a very considerable number of hours. Similarly, in favor of B1-B and even the "lame goblin" - strike aircraft, not a station wagon. A-10s are also used, and it seems that they do not plan to replace them with Lightings.

                  Do not absolutize the specific experience of Israel in all countries of the world. Russia has other opponents of a completely different level of technical development than Iraq or Syria with Egypt.

                  I also do not understand the meaning of the three models from Sukhoi. But in my opinion, the Su-30 is superfluous. Su-35S and Su-34 occupy their niches.
                  1. voyaka uh
                    voyaka uh 27 December 2017 11: 26
                    0
                    The latest F-111s were decommissioned in 2010.
                    And the Su-34 is a blatantly unsuccessful aircraft.
                    1. sivuch
                      sivuch 27 December 2017 15: 21
                      +2
                      Frankly successful in its niche (the spread of barmaley does not apply to it)
                      1. Dry
                        Dry 27 December 2017 16: 45
                        0
                        And what is his niche if the spread of barmaley does not apply to her?
                      2. Kasym
                        Kasym 27 December 2017 16: 51
                        +1
                        The warrior ran into universalization, which is very bad. You give an example of that F-35 - it catches silence and how it continues to throw out slogans at the demonstration. Su-34 is still just raw. A front bomber is a very complex machine that you can’t give birth to in two or three years. hi
                        F-35, as a fighter in speed and maneuverability, will lose to that MiG-35. Like a bomber (combat load), the Su-24. Like an attack aircraft, the Su-25.
                        It is useless to argue with the SLOGAN. laughing
  13. m.cempbell
    m.cempbell 26 December 2017 20: 09
    +1
    I apologize, I can’t handle all the comments, can I repeat someone, BUT ... 2100 at altitude, what speed is this? 1000 km from the PTB - yes it will take off from the strip, reach the front line and urgently turn around! And if the BVB? Fuel for the "return journey" is no longer enough ... 10 goals at the same time - is it a slot Zhuk-M? Where is the MiG-35? I see only the MiG-29.
    I remember talking about Zhuk-A with AFAR, 2400-2600 speed, 2-2,5 hours duration, 1000 km - min radius WITHOUT PTB! Engines with OVT, well, etc. ... Where is the MiG-35?
    1. abc_alex
      abc_alex 27 December 2017 01: 54
      +1
      You can put any equipment on the MiG-35; it is an open platform. What MO will order, it will be. In full mincemeat there are both AFAR and OVT. But what will happen on the MiG-35С - not yet announced.

      And the range in the article is some kind of left. 2000 - 2400 without extra. tanks from him according to developers, in a single version - up to 3000.
  14. Eroolguy
    Eroolguy 27 December 2017 01: 29
    0
    well, 30 minutes of flight, with three !!! (3, three, outboard, fuel, tanks) completely, completely) to protect the Moscow region and quickly to refuel, what is the concept? Type flew all gave lyuley and quickly to refuel? What if an air, maneuverable battle?)
  15. Evkur
    Evkur 27 December 2017 01: 39
    +1
    I read all the comments, the conclusion - "we will not change our daggers for hours!" Even from everyday examples, what is more universal always loses to the highly specialized in a specific task.
  16. sivuch
    sivuch 27 December 2017 17: 30
    +2
    Dry,
    During the development period, the top ten B was called the Japan bomber in the design bureau itself. And in general, any technological adversary developed. This is when you can’t get by with just leaving to an altitude of 5+ km.
  17. myobius59
    myobius59 27 December 2017 20: 18
    0
    But is there such a large plant in Lukhovitsy that they will immediately produce both Mig-35 and IL-114-300?
  18. Alkonost
    Alkonost 29 December 2017 16: 42
    0
    In the winter they presented the Mig-35, talked about the innovations that have appeared on it recently and, in particular, about the modernized power plant. And here an interesting moment, the engine was just one of the reasons that Indians did not suit at one time. But, the presentation has passed, but there is still no contract. And in the summer there was interesting news. I quote:
    The Fazotron-NIIR Corporation is developing an airborne radar station with an active phased array (AFAR) for the promising light MiG-35 fighter, the corporation told Interfax-AVN.
    "The first pre-production radar model with AFAR for the MiG-35 can be created before the end of this year," the agency’s source said. https://vpk.name/news/186312_pervyii_predseriinyi
    i_obrazec_radara_s_aktivnoi_fazirovannoi_reshetko
    i_dlya_mig35_planiruetsya_sozdat_do_konca_goda.ht
    ml
    But the characteristics of AFAR were also on the list of what did not suit Indians at the time. And now it turns out that our military is also not happy? So the question is, have the AFAR been completed or not? And how much will they test?
    Now one thing is good, the fundamental decision on the acquisition was made at the highest level and the program is under control. But, as you can see, the military requires first to bring everything to mind, and therefore constant delays for a year now. If all this had been done during the Indian tender, we would have won it and we would have had more than a dozen in the ranks. This plane is very necessary, but the problem is that it is needed yesterday.