Military Review

"After ten years, MiG-LMFS will be left without clients": the West evaluated the progress of work on the new fighter

72

Over the past two decades, the Russian manufacturer of MiG fighters has entered a "steep dive" due to the commercial success of Sukhoi aircraft, caused by the widespread distribution of the Flanker family and the emergence of the fifth generation Su-57 and the S-70 Okhotnik strike drone.


View from the West at the MiG-LMFS


This opinion is expressed by the Italian edition of Defense Analysis, which tried to assess the prospects for the development of light MiG fighters. Apparently, under the auspices of Rostec, the corresponding work is being carried out. At the same time, a promising combat platform will be suitable for transformation into a drone.

According to the publication, the purpose of these works, which started in 2015, is to create a lighter type of fighter with one engine and low costs for its purchase and maintenance. In this case, the cost will be very different from the "Flankers", which will be beneficial to a wide range of foreign countries. The new aircraft received the designation LMFS (light multifunctional front-line aircraft).

A number of analysts believe that its creation is being carried out with an eye on the previously canceled MiG-1.44 project. fifth generation. In particular, Mikoyan's bureau sought to achieve "absorption" of radar waves thanks to an innovative experimental electromagnetic plasma that would be generated all around the fuselage.

The MiG-LMFS has a layout that is clearly borrowed from the MiG-1.44. With a takeoff weight of about 15 tons and dimensions almost similar to the MiG-35 (length 15,5 meters and a wingspan of about 11,5 meters), the MiG-LMFS will be able to carry up to 5 tons of combat load, including the promising medium-range X- 77M, which will be housed in one or two internal bays for increased stealth.

The installation of a 30-mm GSh-301 cannon is also expected, and as for the power plant, an 11-ton traction unit based on the RD-33MK-35 engine is being discussed. The MiG-LMFS will be able to cover up to 4000 km with a maximum speed of 2500 km / h.

Deadlines can't stand


The creation of the LFMS multipurpose stealth fighter will allow MiG to compete for the world market at a time when it will need to replace the MiG-29, F-16 and Saab JAS 39 Gripen fighters.

- noted in the publication, which believes that after the abandonment of single-engine aircraft, Russia "has nothing more to offer those countries that have long been asking for light fighters equipped with one engine." In particular, recently the Vietnamese military leadership announced the search for a modern replacement for the MiG-21.

It is not yet known how long it will take to develop the new MiG. But waiting another 10 years for the deployment of LFMS production can mean the loss of future customers and the failure of the project, which has no chance of implementation.

- concludes the edition.

72 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. Theodore
    Theodore 15 January 2021 05: 56
    +10
    About this plasma, they have been talking about 30 years! But no one saw her in action ... recourse
    1. Ka-52
      Ka-52 15 January 2021 06: 38
      +3
      About this plasma, they have been talking about 30 years! But no one saw her in action

      plasma around the fuselage will not work as a stealth component. Most likely, its manifestations will distort the mark from the aircraft on the radar screen, making identification, identification and guidance difficult
      1. PN
        PN 15 January 2021 06: 44
        +1
        Why not? If the same radio signal does not pass through it ...
        1. Ka-52
          Ka-52 15 January 2021 06: 53
          +11
          she herself will glow perfectly even without irradiation of her radar
          1. KCA
            KCA 15 January 2021 07: 18
            +3
            And there are many air defense systems with OLS in the world? Then the plasma is different, in the most ordinary fluorescent lamps there is also plasma, but it is not it that glows, but the phosphor, I remember these gas-discharge lamps were also called cold light
            1. Ka-52
              Ka-52 15 January 2021 08: 03
              +2
              And there are many air defense systems with OLS in the world?

              but you forgot about the radar? And mattress AN / AAQ-37 and our OLS-35.
              daylight is also plasma,

              to absorb the radio signal, a high electron density of the cloud of ionized gas is needed IMHO. Let me remind you of the stealth principle - the radio signal must either be absorbed or reflected away from the radar, the source of the sounding radio signal. In the usual principle, this is achieved either by using ferromagnetic coatings (absorption) or by using planes in the aircraft structure that do not reflect the signal at right angles. How can this be implemented in a plasma cloud?
              1. KCA
                KCA 15 January 2021 11: 26
                0
                Have you forgotten about the detection range of airborne OLS? A couple of tens of kilometers, the range of small-radius RVV
                1. Ka-52
                  Ka-52 15 January 2021 12: 02
                  +1
                  Have you forgotten about the detection range of airborne OLS? A couple of tens of kilometers, the range of small-radius RVV

                  come on! laughing OLS-35 gives the detection range of a fighter-type target in the rear hemisphere 80-90 km, in PPS - 30-35 km. What does the RVV have to do with it, did not quite understand the idea?
                  1. KCA
                    KCA 15 January 2021 12: 58
                    +1
                    Shipborne OLS "Sirius" NATO countries:
                    - detection range of aircraft or supersonic anti-ship missiles over 20 km, subsonic anti-ship missiles - over 12 km;
                    - target designation accuracy exceeds 1 mrad;
                    - the number of simultaneously tracked targets up to 500, with the 32 most dangerous of them selected automatically according to the specified criteria;
                    - the rate of false alarms when working on real backgrounds is less than one per hour;
                    - viewing angle in elevation up to +14 degrees;
                    - azimuth survey speed 78 rpm;
                    - spectral working range - D (8 -12 microns);
                    - the FPU matrix is ​​made of an alloy of cadmium, mercury and tellurium with the number of elements of 1024 and internal multiplexing;
                    - the cryogenic system is provided by a Sterling refrigeration machine;
                    - consumed electricity 115V, 60 Hz, 4,5 kW.
                    How much energy is generated by the take-off from the engine or APU of the fighter? Target detection range and guidance at 90 km? nurse. RVV despite the fact that when the OLS detects a fighter, it will already be fired off by missiles, I'm not a physicist, but there are articles about the possibility of radar through a plasma cloud
                    1. Ka-52
                      Ka-52 18 January 2021 04: 38
                      0
                      Shipborne OLS "Sirius" NATO countries:
                      - detection range of aircraft or supersonic anti-ship missiles over 20 km, subsonic anti-ship missiles - over 12 km;

                      Before writing something like that, you should probably think with your head? RCC, flight altitude above the sea surface on the final segment of the trajectory - 3-5m. in the conditions of reflections of the underlying water surface, into the front hemisphere .... Does this mean anything to you? A hint is the hardest possible condition to detect. It would be so simple - the developers of anti-ship missiles would not be chasing such a BP flight model.
                      The official characteristics of the OLS-35 (on our Crackers) are not too different from what I wrote above:

                      Auto tracking area +/- 900 in azimuth, - 150 ... + 600 in elevation.
                      The detection range of the CC (aircraft type Su-30):
                      - in ZPS up to 90 km, in PPS - up to 35 km.
                      Measurement of the range to the EC from 0,2 to 20 km, to the SC - up to 30 km.
              2. Elena Zakharova
                Elena Zakharova 15 January 2021 14: 06
                +2
                How can this be implemented in a plasma cloud?

                Why should you implement what you wrote about in a plasma cloud?
                1. Aerodrome
                  Aerodrome 15 January 2021 16: 17
                  -4
                  Quote: Elena Zakharova
                  How can this be implemented in a plasma cloud?

                  Why should you implement what you wrote about in a plasma cloud?

                  yes ... let's switch to protoplasm, it is a more viscous substance, any waves should be extinguished there, and even common sense ... (I reviewed "ghost hunters)
  2. Ka-52
    Ka-52 15 January 2021 05: 58
    +3
    Over the past two decades, the Russian manufacturer of MiG fighters has entered a "steep dive" due to the commercial success of Sukhoi aircraft, caused by the widespread distribution of the Flanker family and the emergence of the fifth generation Su-57 and the S-70 Okhotnik strike drone.

    RSK MiG has been the victim of a merger with PJSC Sukhoi for a couple of years now. And Ilya Sergeevich Tarasenko drives them, who was and is the director of Sukhoi
    1. Polite Moose
      Polite Moose 15 January 2021 07: 37
      +9
      Quote: Ka-52
      RSK MiG has been the victim of a merger with PJSC Sukhoi for a couple of years now. And Ilya Sergeevich Tarasenko drives them, who was and is the director of Sukhoi

      Imagine: this very Ilya Sergeevich is sitting in his office. Suddenly - a phone call! He picks up the phone, and there he was: "... uh-uh, good afternoon. We urgently need a light plane with one engine. There is no time to swing ..."
      1. Ka-52
        Ka-52 15 January 2021 08: 30
        +7
        something is not calling this polite and recognizable voice request
        1. Polite Moose
          Polite Moose 15 January 2021 08: 40
          +1
          Quote: Ka-52
          something is not calling this polite and recognizable request voice

          We can read our comments and ...
          1. Alex777
            Alex777 15 January 2021 16: 38
            +1
            In 2018 I already called. SUVVP. Single-engine.
            Perhaps, under this theme and merged all together.
            And the "second stage" engine from the Su-57 will be super.
            1. bayard
              bayard 15 January 2021 22: 46
              +1
              Quote: Alex777
              In 2018 I already called. SUVVP. Single-engine.
              Perhaps, under this theme and merged all together.

              As far as rumors reached, the SUVVP is being dealt with by the Yakovlev Design Bureau.
              Well, or what's left of him.
              But the architecture there, of course ... specific, adapted specifically for UVVP, for placing a fan, or vertical thrust engines ... As a result, we should expect something similar to the F-35 ... Maybe more elegant ...
              And for a mass light single-engine aircraft, all this is superfluous.
              It should be as simple as possible, easy to maintain and have an acceptable (not high) price.
              A kind of F-16, J-10 or, if you like, the MiG-21 of our time.
              Therefore, the Izdeliye-30 engine, the fuselage a la what is in the picture, AFAR radar, avionics and weapons from the Su-57 backlog, and we will get what we need.
              The main thing is not to be too clever, as happened with the amers with the F-35.
              And there will be not a plane, but a song.

              And the SUVVP, if one is needed and useful to our aircraft, if its required amount will justify the cost of its development and launch of production (by attracting partners, or pre-ordering from interested parties), must be created as a separate project. Not to the detriment of LFMI.
              For SUVVP will definitely not be simple and not cheap.
              But in terms of avionics and engine ... perhaps in the cockpit and in some other elements, unification is not only possible, but also desirable.
              1. Alex777
                Alex777 16 January 2021 00: 28
                0
                For SUVVP will definitely not be simple and not cheap

                The ability to be based on a patch will pay off.
                For a front-line light fighter, this is the main thing.
                There are no competitors (F-35V forgotten) from the word at all.
                And the fleet (any) will gladly take it. hi
                1. bayard
                  bayard 16 January 2021 01: 10
                  +3
                  This topic was already discussed on the site several years ago, I wrote on this topic, set out my vision of such an aircraft ... after that it was decided to work out this issue. Yakovlev Design Bureau received an order for this study. But the key to this topic is the new "Product-30" engine, without it such an aircraft with sane characteristics is impossible.
                  Now this engine is already on its way, which means that the topic of SUVP is becoming relevant and possible for implementation. But you can seriously engage in such an aircraft only if there is a clear understanding that it is needed and will organically fit into the structure of the RF Armed Forces.
                  Tactical aircraft can quite successfully land on and take off from suitable sections of the highway. And we do not have and will not have many aircraft carriers capable of accepting such aircraft on the deck ... While two are under construction.
                  "Kuznetsov" does not count.
                  If the need for such aircraft is realized, for example, for basing on small islands of the Kuril ridge, etc., in the frontal / border strip and on flat-deck UDC, then it is worth starting. At the same time, having unified this project with the LFMI project as much as possible in the above components.
                  If it is decided that conventional takeoff and landing fighters are preferable for economic, logistic and other (personnel training) reasons, then the design staff should be concentrated on more relevant topics and projects.
                  ... we now have the Il-112 theme ... yes, many others have hung up due to the lack of qualified design personnel.
                  hi
                  1. Alex777
                    Alex777 16 January 2021 06: 16
                    +2
                    But the key to this topic is the new "Product-30" engine, without it such an aircraft with sane characteristics is impossible.

                    I think that with this engine, the SUVP will be very good. The penguin will beat him exactly according to LTH. bully

                    But you can seriously engage in such an aircraft only if there is a clear understanding that it is needed and will organically fit into the structure of the RF Armed Forces.

                    Borisov in 2018 announced that the work had started.

                    Tactical aircraft can quite successfully land on and take off from suitable sections of the highway.

                    I would venture to suggest that already now we have more aircraft than "suitable sites." And there are not only requirements for the canvas. You need fuels and lubricants, ammunition, spare parts, etc. to have at hand. Not every road is convenient to place it. Away from prying eyes is necessary.

                    And we do not have and will not have many aircraft carriers capable of accepting such aircraft on the deck.

                    First, how many aircraft-carrying corrals there will be - we are silent and they are doing the right thing. Why wake up smartly? We must build in silence.
                    Secondly, the plane will be special.
                    It seems to me that those who want to pull themselves up. And the Indians need it. And Egypt may be interested for the Mistrals.
                    Yes, and Erdogan needs to plant something on his UDC Anadolu. wink

                    If the need for such aircraft is realized, for example, for basing on small islands of the Kuril ridge, etc., in the frontal / border strip and on flat-deck UDC, then it is worth starting.

                    IMHO about that and speech. We have few dispersal airfields. And the North must also be covered. hi
                    1. bayard
                      bayard 16 January 2021 07: 23
                      +1
                      Quote: Alex777
                      I think that with this engine, the SUVP will be very good. The penguin will beat him exactly according to LTH.

                      It depends on which line-up they choose. If it is the same as that of the F-35, then the flight characteristics will be similar - the thrust of their engines is approximately the same. But ours will have a noticeably higher specific thrust (thrust per kilogram of weight). If a vertical thrust fan and an internal suspension of the weapon are pushed into the case, the fuselage will be inflated like that of a "pregnant penguin".
                      We need a different layout, allowing for a more "slender" and aerodynamic fuselage, without internal suspensions (for a light aircraft this is nonsense) and without a vertical thrust fan, on vertical thrust engines, as on Soviet verticals. They (DVT) weigh much less than a bulky fan with a transmission and shroud. The saved weight and better aerodynamics will more than cover the additional fuel consumption for short takeoff and landing. And while taxiing before takeoff and after landing, an ordinary fighter burns fuel and even more ... But I already wrote about this and there is no need to repeat myself.
                      If they make a normal UVVP combat aircraft with a classic external armament suspension, an aerodynamic fuselage and a DVT, they will receive performance characteristics like the MiG-29 \ 35. And this is very, very good for SUVVP.
                      hi
                      1. Alex777
                        Alex777 16 January 2021 20: 49
                        +1
                        It depends on which line-up they choose. If the same as that of the F-35, then the flight characteristics will be similar - the thrust of their engines is approximately the same.

                        The layout of the F-35 in the States was designed by studying the Yak-141 in detail. But they had a delusional limitation on the creation of unified aircraft.
                        Ours, having studied all the consequences and without unnecessary restrictions, will do everything beautifully. I'm sure.
                        The thrust of the "Product-30" is higher than that of the Penguin.
                        If they make a normal UVVP combat aircraft with a classic external armament suspension, an aerodynamic fuselage and a DVT, they will receive performance characteristics like the MiG-29 \ 35. And this is very, very good for SUVVP.

                        And so it will be. I'm waiting with great interest. Our SUVVP will be a major breakthrough in aviation. IMHO. hi
                      2. bayard
                        bayard 16 January 2021 21: 28
                        +3
                        Quote: Alex777
                        The thrust of the "Product-30" is higher than that of the Penguin.

                        No, their thrust is about the same, or even a little less in the 30th, but our engine is much lighter, almost twice. I think it is precisely such high specific characteristics that delay the completion of work on the engine, its fine-tuning, because the bar is set very high. There is a variable contour - a mode of 2 and 3 contour configuration, depending on the speed and flight modes. They are trying to create this for the latest modification of the F-35.
                        F-35 afterburner - 19,5 tons. , for "Product-30", depending on the temperature on the turbine blades - from 18 to 19,5 tons.
                        But the maximum non-afterburner thrust of the F-35 is 13 tf. , but the "Product-30" - 11 tp. But I think that such a thrust in the afterburner mode of 18 tf. , and when the temperature rises, it will grow by one and a half ton.
                        Until the work on the engine is completed, it is too early to talk about its final characteristics, because by increasing the temperature, we reduce the engine's resource. And now there is a struggle for a resource, perhaps even more than for an extra kilogram of traction.
                        But so far there is no certainty that the study of the SUVVP theme will lead to the creation and adoption of such an aircraft. And even if he appears, it will not be soon. Maybe by the end of the decade ... if we live, of course.
                      3. OgnennyiKotik
                        OgnennyiKotik 16 January 2021 21: 42
                        +1
                        Quote: bayard
                        But so far there is no certainty that the study of the SUVVP theme will lead to the creation and adoption of such an aircraft.

                        In fact, the market is starving in these planes. Many countries would buy them, but the only supplier is the United States. In theory, you can start a joint development with the Indians or the Chinese. In fact, the engine is 4/5 of such an aircraft.
                      4. bayard
                        bayard 16 January 2021 22: 07
                        +1
                        In cooperation with China and India, we have already burned ourselves. We are now burning ourselves with China on a joint wide-body airliner project. With India, the breakdown with the T-50 was enough.
                        But of course we "can repeat". yes
                        We need not so much a development partner as a guaranteed buyer. You can offer this ... Iran. smile
                        Many people may be interested in a ready-made aircraft, but for this such an aircraft must be made. At least in an experimental and demonstration guise.
                        In the meantime, we will wait for "Products-30" and LFMI, and let the Yakovlev Design Bureau work.
                        If it works out, they will definitely not be superfluous.
                  2. EvilLion
                    EvilLion 18 January 2021 08: 36
                    0
                    If on Izd 30 the thrust is not raised to 18 tons, as they promise (for the F-35 19, and more is possible, the engine itself is larger), but up to 16.5, this will already be a breakthrough.
  3. Grits
    Grits 15 January 2021 15: 04
    0
    Quote: Ka-52
    something is not ringing this polite and recognizable goal

    Therefore, Ilya Sergeevich does not itch
  • bk0010
    bk0010 15 January 2021 21: 00
    +1
    Quote: Polite Elk
    We urgently need a light single-engine aircraft.
    What for? We have few pilots, there is nowhere to train them especially (after Serdyukov), there are many tasks, of course, you can save on the engine, but not fundamentally. For me, after the engine and radar are finished for the Su-57, it is necessary to modernize all the factories in order to rivet only the Su-57 on them, instead of fighters, interceptors and front-line bombers.
    1. bayard
      bayard 15 January 2021 23: 52
      +2
      Quote: bk0010
      What for? We have few pilots, there is nowhere to train them especially (after Serdyukov),

      Pilots can be trained. This takes time, but it will take a lot of time to develop and launch LFMI. But "why" ... look at the map of the Russian Federation - at the length of the borders, estimate how many fighter regiments are needed to cover their entire length.
      In addition, the use of only heavy fighters is irrational for economic reasons - not only the planes themselves are expensive, but also the cost of their life cycle. A heavy twin-engine aircraft needs much more time for inter-flight maintenance, and it consumes twice as much fuel per flight.
      On a videoconferencing scale, these are very large numbers.
      Right now and 10 - 15 years ago, the stake on heavy aircraft was justified - the aircraft are already available (Soviet), only a limited number of them can be maintained, the number of regiments has been reduced ... therefore, with the scale of our country, heavy fighters were more rational.
      But times are changing, threats are growing. Objectively, we need to deploy at least 10 additional new regiments in the Aerospace Forces and as many new ones for Naval Aviation.
      If you only build the heavy ones, it's just ruinous. And the possibilities of heavy work are redundant for limited, local tasks. Yes, and only heavy fighters are not needed for export - the demand for light single-engine ones is several times greater ... but Russia has nothing to offer in this segment.
      It got to the point that countries such as Pakistan (along with China) and India began to develop their own light fighters out of hopelessness ... what
      We need LFMI like air. It is he, and not the expensive and difficult to maintain MiG-35, which will help to dramatically increase the combat capabilities of the Aerospace Forces and not ruin the budget.
      And make money on exports.
      In addition, now no one among the leaders of the aircraft industry ... is developing such a fighter. So we have a good chance to be in time with the proposal of such a product before others.

      Need to do .
      1. bk0010
        bk0010 16 January 2021 12: 45
        0
        Quote: bayard
        If you only build the heavy ones, it's just ruinous
        It seems to me that the savings on one engine will be unimportant. You won't be able to save on the rest (well, or instead of a fighter, you will get a target). Plus, the fact that with two engines - a flight accident, with one it will become an accident or even a disaster.
        1. bayard
          bayard 16 January 2021 15: 21
          +4
          Quote: bk0010
          It seems to me that the savings on one engine will be unimportant.

          It is the principal one - on one engine, the "Product-30" LFMI will consume twice as much fuel in flight as the Su-57. This is a huge difference. During the life cycle it is many thousands of tons ...
          On the same plane.
          And that's just fuel efficiency.
          Further .
          Time, cost and complexity of service.
          Interflight and routine maintenance of 2 engines requires twice as much time and man-hours. So it costs MORE.
          And this is the time of inter-flight preparation, efficiency and, again, cost.
          Twice as many parts are needed.
          When replacing engines, change not one, but two ...
          And as for survivability ... Before the MiG-29 and Su-27 (the interceptors Su-15 and MiG-25 do not count - these are air defense), all the aircraft were single-engine, and nothing, our single-engine MiG-23 at the speed of all its twin-engine made rivals (with the F-15 and F-14 there was an approximate parity), was faster than the first MiG-29 and had a greater range.
          The reason that we decided to continue to build only twin-engine fighters was the Vietnam War. It turned out funny:
          - the USSR noted the advantages of a twin-engine line-up, including survivability ...
          - in the USA, on the contrary, they were fascinated by our light MiG-21, and demanded exactly SUCH LFMI, insisting that such light fighters should be 70% of the list of fighter aircraft, and only 30% - heavy ones.

          That is, the conclusions of both sides turned out ... opposite.
          As a result, the Americans, who fought the entire war on Phantoms (they simply did not have anything else suitable), received their coveted "a la MiG-21" - F-16. And they were VERY happy with it.
          And we got a pair of very similar MiG-29 and Su-27.
          And not to say that in terms of operation, our technicians were satisfied. And the life cycle cost of the first modifications of the MiG-29 was even more expensive than that of the Su-27 ... The lineup was much more dense.
          Hence the conclusion - American designers and command made the right conclusions, and got a wonderful aircraft.
          And ours were mistaken, because besides somewhat better survivability, they received a very complex and expensive aircraft to maintain. And its not too great success in the foreign market for SO many years, this is a confirmation.
          It couldn't have been otherwise.
          This is dialectics.
          And banal logic.
          1. bk0010
            bk0010 16 January 2021 17: 48
            0
            Quote: bayard
            The reason that we decided to continue to build only twin-engine fighters was the Vietnam War.
            The reason that we decided to continue building only twin-engine fighters was that many pilots fought on single-engine fighters. Recently the site took place. In addition, with one of our engines, the MIG-29 could not compete with the F-16, but it was made to fight the F-16.
            1. bayard
              bayard 16 January 2021 18: 32
              0
              Quote: bk0010
              In addition, with one of our engines, the MIG-29 could not compete with the F-16, but it was made to fight the F-16.

              It was made to "gain air supremacy in the frontline zone." And they appeared with the F-16 almost at the same time, approximately cost one another, but ours was of course faster and somewhat more maneuverable.
              But the cost of this advantage was the complexity of the service and the cost of the life cycle.
              Was it possible to make a single-engine fighter with the characteristics of the MiG-29?
              Quite.
              And the Sukhoi Design Bureau had such proposals.
              And the AL-31F engine made it possible to do this.
              But here is not the dispute about that. Our generals, having seen enough "Phantoms" and carried away by their outstanding capabilities and survivability at that time (often left the battle on one engine), formulated the terms of reference, in which they prescribed in black and white - "only two engines, spaced apart".
              And we got two outstanding aircraft (29th and 27th).
              according to the plans of those years, the next generation was supposed to replace them in the ranks in the mid-90s. Therefore, the airframe's resource was provided ... limited. Especially the MiG-29.
              But new times have come. The price of the issue began to matter and ... it turned out that the MiG-29 was even more expensive to operate than the heavy Su-27.
              And they began to sell them abroad.
              Out of service .
              Reducing as much as possible their number in the Air Force (later VKS).
              And a paradoxical situation arose that in combat units we have more than half the number of light fighters than heavy ones.
              In contrast to the same USA and other countries that have both light and heavy fighters in the Air Force.
              All have two-thirds of their fighter fleets light.
              On the contrary, we have heavy ones.
              And this was not a "military trick" at all, but the banal price of the issue of price and efficiency.
              But if the number of fighter aircraft is planned to be brought to the required values, then it is wiser to do this by deploying new regiments on light fighters with one engine.
              ... And the new Su-57 will replace the decommissioned Su-27.
  • Lipchanin
    Lipchanin 15 January 2021 06: 18
    +3
    the West assessed the progress of work on the new fighter

    Well, in the "west" of course "everyone" knows about us. (sarcasm if anything)
    I admit that not everything is so smooth, but not to such an extent that "everything is gone, throw the bags, the station is leaving"
  • rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 15 January 2021 06: 27
    +7
    MiG-LMFS will be able to carry up to 5 tons of combat load
    The Su-27 has a combat load of 8 tons, of course there is a difference, but it is probably light because it has one engine? But really poor countries would like to acquire modern, but not expensive aircraft. Therefore, when put into operation for export, a really worthy copy. The only question is when?
    1. dauria
      dauria 15 January 2021 07: 46
      +8
      But really poor countries would like to acquire modern, but not expensive aircraft.

      So it has been for a long time. Swedish SAAB JAS-39E "Gripen". And it was made with an emphasis on ease of ground handling. Quick replacement, built-in monitoring system, operation "on condition". One officer with a laptop and five blacks. One engine, the scheme is ideal for supersonic maneuvering, wing loading, thrust-to-weight ratio, small RCS. Everything is balanced - not a record, but just good. Not stealth, but close. The USA jumped out of their pants to pinch this competitor with their F-16s. And in some places the F-35 could move a little, where an American with his bells and whistles would be superfluous.
      1. Aerodrome
        Aerodrome 15 January 2021 16: 19
        -1
        Quote: dauria
        But really poor countries would like to acquire modern, but not expensive aircraft.

        So it has been for a long time. Swedish SAAB JAS-39E "Gripen". And it was made with an emphasis on ease of ground handling. Quick replacement, built-in monitoring system, operation "on condition". One officer with a laptop and five blacks. One engine, the scheme is ideal for supersonic maneuvering, wing loading, thrust-to-weight ratio, small RCS. Everything is balanced - not a record, but just good. Not stealth, but close. The USA jumped out of their pants to pinch this competitor with their F-16s. And in some places the F-35 could move a little, where an American with his bells and whistles would be superfluous.

        all right, but two hearts are better.
      2. V.I.P.
        V.I.P. 15 January 2021 21: 26
        +1
        In addition to Grippen and F-16, there are also single-engine aircraft. Indian Tajes, Chinese FC-1 (JF-17) three modifications including with AFAR which is not available on Russian aircraft, JL-9 (FTC-2000), J-10 (F-10) four modifications ... Those who want to have a single engine the plane is a lot ...
  • Boratsagdiev
    Boratsagdiev 15 January 2021 06: 30
    +4
    "The MiG-LMFS has a layout clearly borrowed from the MiG-1.44" - it can't be! ... just a coincidence.
    Everyone knows that only galoshes and felt boots (C), felt boots for Africa, galoshes for the Chukchi were made in the USSR.
    1. Eug
      Eug 16 January 2021 09: 02
      0
      As for me, rather a minus than a plus. This is about the layout, not about the post.
  • oracul
    oracul 15 January 2021 06: 33
    +3
    This is real life. Circumstances are changing (these are sanctions, and a pandemic, and crises, and betrayal, and a brain drain, and the emergence of new and unexplored competitors), keep abreast, work hard, study more and twitch less.
  • Thrifty
    Thrifty 15 January 2021 07: 09
    +4
    Here they are right that we have nothing in the version of a light single-engine aircraft, and this is also a segment of the world arms market. This is good money, this is jobs, this is new technologies. ... and all this is not here ...
  • FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 15 January 2021 07: 13
    +10
    Quote: rotmistr60
    MiG-LMFS will be able to carry up to 5 tons of combat load
    The Su-27 has a combat load of 8 tons, of course there is a difference, but it is probably light because it has one engine? But really poor countries would like to acquire modern, but not expensive aircraft. Therefore, when put into operation for export, a really worthy copy. The only question is when?

    Never.
    There is nothing from the word at all. No engine, no avionics, no h..ra. Remember the story with Zhuk-A. For 15 years we did and did not do it. They are pushing the MiG-35 VKS with the old radar.

    This project, if it takes place, will be utopia. The MiG has no personnel to pull the project. Their destiny is to forever modernize the MiG-29, they no longer know how to create anything there and cannot
    1. Titus_2
      Titus_2 15 January 2021 12: 07
      +4
      Your categorical nature is understandable, but I consider it a bad idea to leave one design bureau "Su"
      1. Hexenmeister
        Hexenmeister 15 January 2021 12: 45
        +1
        Why one? And what about work on the MiG-31, what is Sukhoi doing? It's just that in the segment under consideration, Mig has not been able to give out anything for a long time ...
  • Zaurbek
    Zaurbek 15 January 2021 09: 18
    +6
    It is unlikely that it will be mini 1.44. This topic was one of the 5th generation "branches". EE and the Americans considered, but the concept of F22 and F23 won. There is the F-35, the Japanese, Korean, British and European are in development. These are the concepts of a light-medium fighter. There are some results on Su57 ..... there is a turbojet engine - Product 30.

    Compiling all this will give us the look of the LFMS. Pictures and models are already being drawn and published. And what is in the picture is the thought of the 80s
  • Andrey.AN
    Andrey.AN 15 January 2021 09: 48
    0
    There is no sense in exporting equipment that does not interest their videoconferencing, playing roulette in weak positions. The classic MiG has good positions - the golden mean, one might say, is not a crude version with a good reputation, prices depend on the volume of orders, here a lot depends on our videoconferencing systems, they will take the volume by knocking down the price, they will take the Indians and shoot them down, others will catch up, it will be even cheaper, if the manufacturer immediately shakes it down. The classic layout of the MiG is clearly more abruptly than any single-engine one, and the price can become proportionate.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 15 January 2021 10: 10
      +2
      The main thing is the unification of the key nodes with the Su57. TRD - cabin-weapon. Maybe find a partner country, as they did with F35.
      1. Andrey.AN
        Andrey.AN 15 January 2021 15: 08
        +1
        It is unlikely that the military-industrial complex is already full of companions in the field of military-technical cooperation. Yes, there is already a MiG-35, they probably dance from it. It flies from unpaved strips, and what else can there be in a light fighter that is not in the MiG-35? Only the hidden placement of the combat load, here, using the example of the Su-57, they know how to relocate this load while maintaining the parameters. Stealth cutting edge on reflective areas is not a problem.
        1. Zaurbek
          Zaurbek 15 January 2021 15: 37
          +3
          It does not have new generation engines ... but why do with old ones? Both world experience and the market have shown that a single-engine aircraft is more in demand.
          1. Andrey.AN
            Andrey.AN 15 January 2021 15: 44
            0
            On light cars, there will be no afterburner supersonic. For example, on a heavy MiG-31, less than half of the thrust to mass is needed for supersonic, on the Su-35 it is already closer to unity, on the lungs it is very close. And so, the engines are the most advanced there.
            1. Zaurbek
              Zaurbek 15 January 2021 16: 07
              0
              Well, not only the thrust determines ... if you do not focus on the aircraft carrier. I don't see the point.
              1. Andrey.AN
                Andrey.AN 15 January 2021 16: 32
                0
                You see no point in a light front-line fighter capable of operating from unpaved strips, the flight of which is much cheaper. Or sense in a ready-made and polished technology by generations, superior to a single-engine one at least by the acceleration of turbines (two smaller ones change the mode faster than one big one). And the meaning of ruining cool equipment for the sake of a pig in a poke is obvious?
                1. Zaurbek
                  Zaurbek 15 January 2021 18: 14
                  0
                  Mig23 could work from unpaved strips?
                  1. Andrey.AN
                    Andrey.AN 15 January 2021 19: 47
                    0
                    He was replaced by more capable ones. And at the expense of cruising supersonic, it is achieved in three ways, either to increase the kinetic energy of the aircraft, or the kinetic energy of the turbine (it can drive the uranium scrap into the axle to reach high revolutions), or a stupidly bigger engine, all three options critically reduce the acceleration characteristics after any braking, maneuverability in air combat. Now, if this is an interceptor, such as the MiG-31, it is normal, but if the fighter is tasked with escorting assault, bomber or passenger (landing) aviation, slow-speed aircraft, there will be enough supersonic and afterburner, maneuverable air combat is more important.
                    1. Zaurbek
                      Zaurbek 16 January 2021 09: 07
                      0
                      Because there was no necessary turbojet engine, so they put 2pcs
          2. Eug
            Eug 16 January 2021 08: 57
            0
            Don't you consider the non-afterburner version of ed.30?
        2. Eug
          Eug 16 January 2021 08: 59
          0
          There may be an even lower life cycle cost.
  • Lord of the Sith
    Lord of the Sith 15 January 2021 10: 09
    +1
    4 billion have already been allocated for the project. Let's see what happens.
    1. Zaurbek
      Zaurbek 15 January 2021 10: 27
      +2
      Well, the turbojet engine is already there ...
    2. Titus_2
      Titus_2 15 January 2021 12: 19
      +1
      It is good that a strong-willed decision has already been made, but .... the use of funds, unfortunately, does not guarantee the result.
      1. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 15 January 2021 13: 27
        -1
        Let's take a look. Money has already learned to count, these are not the Yankees with their monstrous cut of the budget))
  • Reserve buildbat
    Reserve buildbat 15 January 2021 18: 00
    +2
    Here are just a discrepancy with the video in the article. It says "Kh-77M missiles", but the video says "K-77M missiles", that is, R-77M, as I understand it. In general, an interesting project, but it is likely to be crushed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau.
    1. times
      times 15 January 2021 21: 28
      +19
      Quote: Stroibat stock
      In general, an interesting project, but it is likely to be crushed by the Sukhoi Design Bureau

      Future will tell. A single-engine aircraft has long been asking.
      1. Reserve buildbat
        Reserve buildbat 16 January 2021 08: 19
        0
        It has been asking for 30 years, but things are still there. Back in the late 90s, the Sukhoi Design Bureau actively tried to promote the single-engine S-54 project.
  • Eug
    Eug 16 January 2021 08: 55
    +1
    Energetically, no one tried to estimate how much power the onboard generator requires to create this plasma cloud? As I understand it (only guesses), the Su-35 is equipped with two 35 kW HP-35s, and this is without a plasma generator. And pull the old RD-33, albeit many times modified, why not take the non-afterburner version of izd. 30 with the same thrust of 11 tons? The afterburner version will probably have a much lower fuel consumption, the diameter, however, is larger. And engine unification. As for me, the "tailless" will not be stealthy for sure, and if, with the "bucket" of the ventral air intake, it will shine in such a way that no plasma will help. As for me, if they want to make LMFS on the ideas described in the article - a clean cut on old luggage.
  • Elturisto
    Elturisto 16 January 2021 11: 30
    0
    First, we need to bring Poghosyan and his accomplices to justice. This pack, to please the Americans from GE, hacked all attempts by the MIG to organize the production of a new fighter, a modern analogue of the MiG-21.
  • Eug
    Eug 16 January 2021 21: 25
    0
    The topic of a light fighter has been of interest for a long time. I believe that for a number of reasons it is certainly promising and needed, and now there is an opportunity to develop it relatively quickly and inexpensively, based on the development of the engine and equipment for the Su-57. The characteristics of the "second stage" engine (30 products), the main ones are 11 non-afterburner thrust, 000 afterburner with dimensions and weight slightly less than those of the 18 product, specific fuel consumption is 000-117% lower. What is embarrassing is the rather large diameter and length of this engine, even without the afterburner, but, most likely, the integrated circuit will allow this to be "overlooked". There is a temptation to design an LMFS based on the FOREVER option practically in the dimensions of the MiG-10, while the take-off weight will noticeably increase compared to the MiG-12 (empty weight - 21 (of which avionics-21), normal takeoff - 7400, maximum without stealth, i.e. with external suspension - 500, cannon 12A000-15K - 000 pcs. (with ammunition for each barrel of 9 rounds - 1 kg.), normal load in the internal compartments - 4071 kg (2 UR RVV-MD and 150 UR RVV-SD with ejection-launching devices), fuel in internal tanks - 360 kg., Respectively, in the version with maximum take-off weight, internal suspension 760 kg. Plus external suspension 2 kg., Fuel in internal tanks 2 kg. Plus - optional - 2400 kg. (PTB instead of load.) It is advisable to provide for the suspension of KAB-760 and other ammunition of the same weight category in a semi-submerged manner with the compartment covers removed. I do not consider the VTOL aircraft option, I consider an OVT and a springboard on the runway as an alternative (by analogy with Kuznetsov, experimentswere carried out in case of takeoff from the runway from an intact section of 3000 meters). All equipment (with slightly reduced parameters and, accordingly, smaller dimensions and weight), systems integration schemes - with the Su-2400. Something like this...
  • FRoman1984
    FRoman1984 17 January 2021 07: 08
    -1
    I am in favor of one heavy aircraft such as the Su-35 or Su-57. With the size of our country and the length of the borders. Which would combine functions and air defense too. And it will be better and cheaper for logistics: there is no large nomenclature of spare parts for several types of aircraft, personnel training again.
    I understand small states that need a light and inexpensive (although how to say inexpensive, using the example of Raphael or the latest modification of the F-16) aircraft for air defense functions, but the heavy one has nowhere to deploy.

    Say, we need a light aircraft to gain air supremacy in the front line (MiG-29). The concept of the 70s-80s, when they thought that wars with tank armies were still possible. Well, now what role will the MiG-29 have, when wars have changed, technologies have changed?
  • hostel
    hostel 19 January 2021 12: 35
    0
    Such planes will not interfere with us. For in the event of a mess, there are not many fighters.
  • ROMANO
    ROMANO 21 January 2021 17: 52
    0
    ... The MiG-LMFS will be able to cover up to 4000 km with a maximum speed of 2500 km / h ...

    He will not be able to overcome 4000 km with such a speed. And not a single fighter in the world can. And not just a single fighter.