Will China save MiG?

240

This material is a compilation of comprehension of materials on the Su-35, Su-57, MiG-35 and MiG-31, which have been released recently. Indeed, the situation that is developing around JSC RAC "MiG" causes a very complex set of feelings: bewilderment, surprise, misunderstanding.

Indeed, just recently we condemned the merger aviation concerns "Su" and "MiG", because they understood that the aircraft manufacturers of these firms made such different aircraft that the crossing of "hedgehog and snake" looked more than doubtful.



However, as events since 2001 (when the first tender for the development of a fifth-generation fighter was played) have shown, over the past 20 years RAC MiG has created absolutely NOTHING. Having lost the continuation of the Soviet tender for a new generation fighter (let me remind you that in 1986 MiG put up its project 1.44, and Sukhoi - Su-47) in May 2001, the MiG concern was no longer noticed in new projects.

We understand this: for twenty years, several hundred people simply received a salary, producing practically nothing. And this is not just a shop for the production of squash caviar, it is an aircraft building corporation, which includes design bureaus, test centers, and production facilities of factories in Moscow, Lukhovitsy, Kalyazin, Nizhny Novgorod.

But, alas, this is a fact: for twenty years nothing has been created at RAC MiG that could justify the very existence of the corporation. And you must admit that an aircraft manufacturing corporation that does not develop and does not build aircraft is just unnecessary ballast that needs to be disposed of.

True, the leadership of MiG stubbornly believes that this is not so. And at the disposal of RAC "MiG" there are products with a great future. For example, the MiG-35.

MiG-35: flown into history. Yes, it was under this name that we spoke just recently about the fate of the MiG-35 fighter and that it could help out the corporation and be useful to the Russian Air Force. MiG-35: flies into history as unnecessary

And indeed, a light fighter paired with a heavy one, exactly as described in the material, is not a bad tactic. It would really be useful if not for one "BUT".

Every medal has two sides.

If you look very carefully at the MiG-29M - MiG-29M2 - MiG-29SMT - MiG-35 chain, then the difference will be, of course, but not critical. The engine is still the same RD-33, nicknamed "Diesel", for its smoke and gluttony, which does not provide a decent flight range for a light fighter. While "Sushki" can simply "hang" for several hours in the air, "MiGs" have only recently got rid of the offensive nickname "short drive aircraft". It was in the modification of the MiG-29SMT, when additional fuel tanks appeared behind the cockpit (they are such a characteristic “hump”), that the flight duration increased to more than two hours.

In fact, the difference between the MiG-29SMT and the MiG-35 is minimal. Both have the same ancestor, the MiG-29M2, only the MiG-29SMT was developed "for itself", and the MiG-35 was understood as several projects, often focused on sale.

Yes, in 2019, at the MAKS air show, RAC MiG showed the “new” MiG-35 (not to be confused with the presentation in Lukhovitsy, at the plant. It was in 2017). With a new (real) radar with AFAR from the Fazotron Research Institute and a new avionics complex from the Ramensky Instrument-Making Bureau. Quite like an upgrade, but...

But the question arises: why did the Russian Aerospace Forces refuse to buy the aircraft? Do they not understand their happiness or do they understand too well?


Regarding the fact that the MiG-35, on which the RSU "MiG" had such hopes, was bought by the VKS in a "huge" amount of 6 pieces, there were more than enough versions.

I think that the truth is that the aircraft that made its first flight in 1977 (namely, then the MiG-29 flew) simply exhausted all the possibilities of modernization. Let's call it the Indian point of view. Hindus, famous buyers of our weapons, for 12 years they played a competition for the purchase of aircraft, and as a result, RAC MiG lost this competition miserably.

One can talk for a long time about bias, bias, pressure and so on towards Indian partners, but everything is killed by one question: why did Russia not acquire such a beautiful aircraft for itself?

After all, the “same” MiG-35 was already equipped with a radar with AFAR at the beginning of the games with the Indians. So it's not about electronics. The point is an outdated airframe and frankly old and inefficient engines. It is quite possible that the installation of a new engine would have delayed the retirement of the aircraft, but ... Probably, it would have been easier to develop a new aircraft.

This is obviously the problem here.

Problems of a personnel nature. There are no people, designers who can really work on the creation of aircraft in MiG. They say that the era of those who knew how to think through aircraft "to the screw" ended with Vladimir Barkovsky. Only "effective managers" remained, for whom the sale of land in the Dynamo area is much more important than the development of new aircraft.

By the way, Barkovsky, who actually became the last real general designer, came from the Sukhoi system. But he knew how to build airplanes. But in general, all the last critical years, MiG was headed by leaders from the competitor company Sukhoi - Nikitin, Fedorov, Pogosyan, Korotkov. Completely without hints and comments,

As a result, RAC "Mig", left without design engineers, and in 2011-12 there were many articles on this topic, talk about extremely beggarly salaries in RAC "MiG" appeared regularly, degraded completely and irrevocably.

The only thing the company is good at is building the MiG-29 and upgrading it in small quantities. There are still buyers. But buyers for such an old aircraft are not an eternal and thankless task. The example of India and Algeria is very indicative, although the Algerian MiG-29SMT was generally useful to the Russian Aerospace Forces.


So, the situation is ahovskoe. There are no orders for the MiG-29, the MiG-35, which does not differ much from the MiG-29SMT, is also not very interested in foreign buyers. Today, everyone in the world prefers machines with modernization potential, capable of serving for a long time, and most importantly, cheap. Cheap MiGs can serve, but everyone has questions about the duration and modernity.

The whole question is how long RAC "MiG" will last on the repair of Egyptian, Syrian and Iranian MiG-29s. In principle, the plane has already become the same symbol as the AK-47, that is, an aircraft for the Air Force of third world countries. Eritrea, Cuba, North Korea…


In general, the well-being of the RAC "MiG" is completely dependent on the enterprise "Rosoboronexport", which is the only supplier of orders for the RAC. If they conclude contracts with Rosoboronexport for the supply or modernization of the MiG-29, there will be work. No, it's understandable.

And in fact, orders from third world countries for the MiG-29 are all that RAC MiG can count on.

Apparently, everyone understands everything. Hence the cessation of attempts to "unwind" the MiG. The main evidence that everyone at all levels of power has already given up is the fact that the RAC MiG plant in Lukhovitsy is defined as a production facility for the production of Il-114 passenger aircraft.

The fact that aircraft will be assembled at an aviation enterprise is wonderful. But the fact that the IL-114 is definitely not a military aircraft, I think, is not worth saying.

So, if the MiG-29 is of interest, then the countries that are not able to buy anything newer. The MiG-29SMT and MiG-35 are of no interest at all, apparently, to no one, for the reasons indicated above. What remains of the RAC "MiG"? In addition to the option to finally dissolve in the RAC "Dry"?

Of the entire range of aircraft, the MiG-31 remained. And there is a very interesting point here.


China is showing interest in the MiG-31. Moreover, you can add the word "again", because once the PRC already wanted to buy these aircraft in the 90s, and not just buy, but also acquire a license for production. But something did not work out, and the PRC, having bought the production rights for almost the entire line of Su-27s, refused the license for the MiG-31 and the interceptors themselves.

Apparently, in the nineties, the command of the PLA of the PRC did not see much point in such aircraft as the MiG-31. In fact, the PRC does not have such a huge border as Russia, and therefore there was no need for super-fast and combat-independent interceptors.

But the PLA Air Force has problems of a slightly different nature.

China has fully mastered the development and production of hypersonic weapons. But these weapons require carriers. The dynamically (even too much) developing PLA fleet requires cover, but the program to create Chinese missile carriers is frankly late.

Problems with the creation of the Xian H-20 strategic bomber, which has been under development for more than 20 years, and the Xian H-6, which is a copy of the Soviet Tu-16, cannot be a carrier of hypersonic weapons due to its high-speed qualities.

The question is that the aircraft carrier of hypersonic weapons must have sufficient speed and height, playing the role of the first stage. Or, it must be an aircraft with a decent payload.

In general, a carrier of hypersonic weapons is conceived as either a heavy strategic bomber that is capable of carrying to a great height and launching several hypersonic missiles from there, or a less noticeable aircraft capable of dispersing the "light version" of the missile, as happened with the "Dagger".

Successful testing and use of the Kinzhal complex, consisting of the MiG-31K carrier and the 9-C-7760 hypersonic missile. The 9-S-7760 missile is an aviation variation of the Iskander OTRK.


Similar developments exist in China. As well as the problems of delivering hypersonic missiles to the launch lines. Still, the PRC has very peculiar borders and neighbors, with whom disputes periodically arise. These are mountainous regions practically inaccessible to technology, and sea and ocean spaces. That is, the plane seems to be a completely normal way to deliver a rocket to the launch line.

MiG-31K could solve this problem for China. And China could solve the problems of survival for RAC MiG.

Will China save MiG?

If until now China has not been able to create anything worthwhile in terms of strategic missile carriers (no matter what size), then it would be worth trying to solve the problem precisely at the expense of the MiG-31K, which are quite suitable for this role.

The fact that China needs such a missile carrier was said by many high-ranking representatives of both the party and the Ministry of Defense. And there is an opinion that it is the MiG-31 that is what is needed, because there is simply no other alternative in the modern aviation market.

And here another problem arises. The point is not even whether our leadership decides to sell such an aircraft to China if it asks to sell missile carriers.

The thing is different: will RAC MiG be able to build aircraft.

Today, let me remind you, RAC MiG is busy (since November 2014) with the modernization of the MiG-31 into the MiG-31BM and will be busy with this until 2023. Then everything. There are no orders, no prospects. A Chinese order would be very handy, in the event that missile carriers can really still be built in the RSK. After all, the last MiG-31 was assembled in 1994. Almost 30 years ago. Given the current state of RAC MiG, this will not be very surprising.

And in this case, RAC "MiG" will simply add to the list of enterprises that "did not write to the market" and something else will be produced at the production facilities, at best. At worst, enterprises will simply be closed, and there will be nothing in their place. As happened with the Lipetsk and Volgograd tractor plants, the Voronezh excavator plant, AZLK, ZIL and beyond. Market…

All in all, we don't have much time left to see how things actually happen. But something tells me that a miracle should not be expected. "MiG" will go down in history. But we have JSC Sukhoi Company, which already produces a fairly wide range of aircraft, from fighters to passenger liners. Perhaps, with the help of the remnants of RAC MiG employees, Sukhoi will be able to further resolve all issues of the development of Russian aviation caused by the death of the aviation companies Mikoyan and Gurevich, Ilyushin, Yakovlev.

And the MiG-31 can really become the swan song of the RAC "MiG", no matter how sad it may sound. Much in this matter depends on the Chinese, but without a miracle in the form of orders for RAC MiG, the issue of liquidation is not a matter of very long time.
240 comments
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. +7
    20 June 2022 06: 07
    there is an opinion that the MiG-31 is exactly what you need, because there is simply no other alternative in the modern aviation market ....

    Dear author, whose opinion is this? what
    Like it or not, but to revive the serial construction of a very expensive
    there is no point in the production and operation of a highly specialized interceptor built on the technologies of the first half of the 1970s. And it’s not a fact that our aviation industry is now capable of this.
    1. +1
      20 June 2022 07: 16
      Unless Kazakhstan has transferred (provided access) to the MiG-31 for the PRC. An increasingly hostile Kazakhstan can do anything.
      1. +16
        20 June 2022 16: 59
        Or Turkey...
        But it seems to me - everything that was in the USSR and interested the West - they already have in one form or another.
        Remember the Gdrov MiG-29s and the documentation for the Yak-141...

        In general, the article is shameful, fu.
        China to save Russia:
        1. We did not give up to anyone, except to get the most out of us.
        2. Are we capable of anything, or what?

        1. 0
          21 June 2022 10: 52
          In general, the article is shameful, fu.
          China to save Russia:
        2. +3
          21 June 2022 12: 24
          And what are we capable of? Even an elementary transport was not mastered. The Volgograd Tractor and Lipetsk Plants have been closed, and Chinese, Korean, American, Japanese, and all other Dutch and Swedish vehicles are working on the roads. Market?
          1. 0
            21 June 2022 14: 33
            For some reason, the USSR could, having only the legacy of a rotten tsarist regime.
            1. 0
              15 September 2022 16: 16
              The USSR was able, first of all, thanks to the planned economy and economic formation. And, of course, people greedy for progress, who with their own eyes saw their fathers in cast-offs, walking behind a horse with a plow.
          2. 0
            15 September 2022 16: 12
            I thought about it and it seems to me that the "market has decided" not quite here. You see, a ruined Soviet plant is not only valuable land for "developers" with "human workers" and hundreds of tons of steel for scrap. A ruined Soviet plant, in the first place, is often a vacant niche in the very "market", which, after the "sale of space", can be successfully occupied by creating a trading organization and reselling imported goods. And okay, if we are talking about the same tractors or trucks ... But there is also a narrow specialization, and like all "narrow" - bringing lard a year. For example, the same equipment for gas / oil production and technology. For example, the USSR itself mined, which means they had their own technologies, and now this niche is almost exclusively occupied by foreign Schlumberg. I think far-sighted figures with lards in their accounts saw such prospects in 91
      2. 0
        20 July 2022 18: 31
        Quote: Civil
        Unless Kazakhstan has transferred (provided access) to the MiG-31 for the PRC. An increasingly hostile Kazakhstan can do anything.

        It’s certainly cool to get documentation for an aircraft of the 70s, but it’s not a fact that the Chinese will be able to build it, if the MIG itself built the last aircraft 30 years ago.
        1. 0
          1 September 2022 09: 21
          But where does Kazakhstan get the documentation for the MiG-31, if they still have several such aircraft, this does not mean at all that they have documentation for their production, the MiG-31 was built only on the stocks of the Sokol aircraft plant in Nizhny Novgorod, and nowhere was no longer going to.
  2. +7
    20 June 2022 06: 07
    But something tells me that a miracle should not be expected. "MiG" will go down in history.

    What else will go down in history?
    1. +1
      20 June 2022 06: 26
      If there were aircraft carriers, it would be an ideal machine for them. Small, lifting, enough range.
      1. +3
        20 June 2022 16: 16
        Quote: Bacha
        Small, lifting, enough range.
        Not small (Mig-35 - 11t, Su-35 - 19t, F-16 - 9t).
        1. +6
          20 June 2022 18: 02
          What kind of numbers are so strange, the weight of an empty car, it doesn’t matter, the maximum takeoff weight of the MiG-35 is 24,5 tons, the Su-35S has 34,5 tons, the F-16 has about 22 tons and it has never been decked like the Su-35S, so why compare, I didn’t understand your thought.
          1. 0
            20 June 2022 18: 55
            He simply noted that the MiG-35 cannot be called a light fighter.
      2. +4
        20 June 2022 21: 08
        the author forgot to mention the instant-29k, which still has room to grow and there is no replacement for it. These are at least 2 ship groups of 48 vehicles.
      3. +1
        21 June 2022 12: 05
        On the deck it is better if there are 2 engines. The new lung Sukhoi seems to have one
    2. +4
      21 June 2022 08: 27
      There will be a fight for grandmas. Distribution of cash flows.
      Remember, a couple of years ago they took and, for some reason, united all design aviation bureaus. Those. the competitive spirit is gone, now it's all in someone's control.
      1. rMN
        0
        27 June 2022 01: 06
        It's a strange competition, if everyone says that the moment is easy and so hard, don't you think?
  3. +3
    20 June 2022 06: 10
    Indeed, the situation that is developing around JSC RAC "MiG" causes a very complex set of feelings: bewilderment, surprise, misunderstanding.

    Sukhoi had already begun to take bread from RAC MiG when he took up the Su-75 light single-engine fighter. The question is whether Sukhoi will engage Mig to work it out.
    1. +3
      20 June 2022 13: 32
      The relevance of the Su-75 even at MAKS raised questions, since then nothing has been heard about it, and in the light of recent events, it is quite possible that it is gathering dust in the backyards of Zhukovsky, and no one remembers about it
    2. 0
      20 June 2022 14: 59
      Quote: riwas
      Sukhoi had already begun to take bread from RAC MiG when he took up the Su-75 light single-engine fighter. The question is whether Sukhoi will engage Mig to work it out.

      MiG may start producing a new interceptor to replace the MiG-31BM.
      1. +3
        21 June 2022 12: 32
        Seriously? An enterprise that is hardly capable of mass-producing even old Soviet fighters?
      2. 0
        20 July 2022 09: 08
        pack-dk isn't already in development?
    3. +4
      20 June 2022 16: 36
      Sukhoi had already begun to take bread from RAC MiG when he took up the Su-75 light single-engine fighter.
      Sukhoi cannot take away bread from the instant, firstly, because the instant has not done anything for a long time, and, secondly, the instant has not made single-engine aircraft for a very long time ....
      The concept of the Su-35 / Mig-35 "heavy / light fighter" did not grow together precisely because the Mig-35 is not a damn light ....
      hi
    4. +4
      20 June 2022 18: 49
      And what prevented the instant from starting on its own initiative, instead of the fact that the instant-29 was procrastinating, starting to develop a light single-engine fighter?
  4. 0
    20 June 2022 06: 26
    How is the Sokol plant? Has it been optimized yet or not?
  5. +8
    20 June 2022 06: 31
    Enterprises and industries in the changed conditions of history and economy are re-profiling. MIG may become the first domestic aviation corporation to switch to work on exclusively unmanned modern aircraft and its serial production.
    1. 0
      24 June 2022 11: 27
      Still not enough! KB Lavochkin is not enough?
      1. +1
        24 June 2022 19: 20
        Competition will be helpful. Flash-and-drying and therefore were not bad throughout the history of brands because they were not absolute monopolists. Unlike the military fighter market, drones have a very promising global civilian market, which should also be squeezed out partially from Western corporations.
        1. 0
          25 June 2022 09: 14
          Maybe so. But, nevertheless, it is not necessary to completely abandon the production of pilot-controlled aircraft.
          It would be nice to answer "Loyal Wingman" and "Kratos XQ-58 Valkyrie". It seems that one of them has recently been tested even as a refueling fighter.
          1. 0
            25 June 2022 14: 03
            That's what Dry is for. And Migovtsy can carry out design work on manned aircraft based on third-party aircraft manufacturing capacities. Now it is important not to fall behind in unmanned technologies, so as not to become technopopoias, as happened literally before our eyes with electronics and the automotive industry, machine tool industry.
            1. +1
              29 July 2022 13: 18
              Do not fall behind in unmanned technologies with dead electronics and machine tool building?
              1. 0
                29 July 2022 20: 05
                Maybe it makes sense to focus on niche drones - unmanned railway trains, agricultural machinery and ships, industrial transport and loaders. It is unlikely that it will be possible to maintain leadership in the automotive consumer goods industry.
          2. 0
            25 June 2022 14: 36
            In general, the example of the electronics industry is an example of landmark events and decisions.
            If they didn’t copy other people’s developments and simply wait for the growth of the Chinese economy, then the world of electronics could remain behind the Soviet technological heritage.
            The Chinese would have taken the development of the Union as a basis and would have flooded the world with cheap chips - provided that they only maintain their independent school and industry and work on the mistakes and improve the quality of Soviet developments.
            The world would be different, and Western electronic and software firms would find themselves in the position of coelacanth fish, a living fossil, or perish in museum storerooms.
            Now the situation is similar with unmanned systems - depending on the decisions being made now, the world will or will not have unmanned vehicles independent of Western countries.
            1. 0
              20 July 2022 18: 39
              Quote: ycuce234-san
              just wait for the growth of the Chinese economy

              Predicting the growth of someone's economy is something else. And by the way, can you tell me what kind of Soviet developments in the field of electronics were ahead of Western ones? You read the articles here "The Birth of Soviet Missile Defense"
              1. 0
                20 July 2022 20: 16
                It is not always necessary to be the first on a technical level.
                The Chinese "abibas-s" were nowhere ahead of anyone in quality - and that is why they captured the world markets, making China what it is now, because they were cheap. Now we see this story again and again in real time: the Chinese are beginning to promote their original (far from the best) cars to the world market and will eventually eat it almost entirely.
                It was about the fact that the Union could offer the Chinese to mass-produce it, albeit not the most advanced microelectronics, instead of shorts. Then the Soviet engineers were in business and generated an intellectual product and the Chinese would have developed even faster and Western electronics standards would not have had a world monopoly.
                1. +1
                  21 July 2022 05: 16
                  Quote: ycuce234-san
                  It is not always necessary to be the first on a technical level.
                  The Chinese "abibas-s" were nowhere ahead of anyone in quality - and that is why they captured the world markets, making China what it is now, because they were cheap. Now we see this story again and again in real time: the Chinese are beginning to promote their original (far from the best) cars to the world market and will eventually eat it almost entirely.
                  It was about the fact that the Union could offer the Chinese to mass-produce it, albeit not the most advanced microelectronics, instead of shorts. Then the Soviet engineers were in business and generated an intellectual product and the Chinese would have developed even faster and Western electronics standards would not have had a world monopoly.

                  Do you remember about the year when China and the USSR began to be friends?
                  1. -1
                    21 July 2022 21: 36
                    In general, the Union could transfer the necessary radio-electronic technologies for joint production to China twice in history - until July 1960 and after May 1989. But even in the interval, when relations cooled, competing with the Chinese, it was possible to "start the Project" with post-war Vietnam, which also needs it was necessary to recover and gnaw out a place for itself in high-tech markets; to place part of the enterprises near Cuba, which, by the way, even now makes simple avionics of its own. It has always been, this opportunity, and now there is also, at a minimum, the creation of assembly and partly production facilities in post-Soviet Asia - thereby reducing labor migration pressure.
                    And without such a transfer of production to the centers of labor migration of the Russian Federation, it will not be possible to raise a high-tech automotive industry with more or less modern cars, to establish the production of small aircraft, etc. But now such a high-tech project cannot be opened with the Chinese - they are too strong and it is more profitable to conduct civil wars with them scientific research and not to build production depending on their moods.
  6. +1
    20 June 2022 06: 31
    And the MiG-31 can really become the swan song of the RAC "MiG", no matter how sad it may sound.

    You know, the swan song sounds sooner or later, because technological progress does not stand still and is driven by young people, but based on the experience of past developments.
    Sometimes it is necessary to change approaches to the organization of production and determine what is more profitable - a dozen average, mediocre models or one (pair) "analogues in the world".
  7. +3
    20 June 2022 06: 54
    will simply add to the list of enterprises that "were not written to the market"
    Much in this matter depends on the Chinese, but without a miracle in the form of orders for RAC MiG, the issue of liquidation is not a matter of very long time.
    I think China will try to "push the falling one", and then buy what can be cheaper, like with Motor Sich request
  8. +32
    20 June 2022 06: 55
    China will not save anyone, in general, the dream that someone will save us for some reason (India, China) is a kind of Ukrainian mri because - "saving the drowning people is the work of the drowning people themselves", and the drowning people seem to have either already drowned (God forbid I'm wrong), or confidently walk along the bottom without intending to emerge. And to sell something to someone from junk, it's just a chance for someone to cut down "malech" money.
  9. +5
    20 June 2022 07: 25
    Will China save MiG?

    Why would China, which has a developed aviation industry, save the MiG?
    1. +5
      20 June 2022 13: 30
      China will not be saved. Can only milk
    2. -4
      20 June 2022 15: 32
      Because China, although it has already increased its competencies in the aviation industry, is still decades behind in some areas (which is worth only their H-6 Tu-16 clone). Therefore, in order to quickly eliminate their backlog, they can follow the proven path of purchasing a certain number of aircraft, as well as a package of accompanying documentation.
      1. +3
        20 June 2022 19: 35
        Quote: Marine63
        Because China, although it has already increased its competencies in the aviation industry, is still decades behind in some areas (which is worth only their H-6 Tu-16 clone). Therefore, in order to quickly eliminate their backlog, they can follow the proven path of purchasing a certain number of aircraft, as well as a package of accompanying documentation.

        And what does MiG have that China does not have? In fact, the MiG has only junk left, unnecessary to anyone ... the reason for this is the doctrine of the late USSR ... what is the MiG-29? A cheap plane (in the Soviet sense of these words) of the front line of a big war, it didn’t need to serve for a long time, hence it’s not the most tenacious glider ... domestic workmanship finally exacerbated this problem. Remember why Algeria abandoned the MiG-29? Then, of course, they said - a lobby from France, they say they gave a bribe, etc., etc., but Algeria never bought a French car, and the Su-30 continued to buy. In general, for 30 years, the MiG has not adapted to a world where the state takes everything they give, the MiG-29 could not become a cheap peacetime aircraft or create something worthwhile ... the team just ate money ...
        1. -3
          21 June 2022 07: 03
          This article specifically refers to an aircraft that may be of interest to the Chinese - MIG 31.
        2. -5
          21 June 2022 07: 31
          China is not capable of making anything even close to the MiG-31, which is why it is interested in buying it or obtaining a license to manufacture it.
        3. +2
          21 June 2022 12: 39
          It is not so much the MiG team that has been eating money for 30 years, but our "helmsmen and team." They built a whole center for one of them, and the second one found that in 20 years we can’t produce anything at all without imports. Even pump oil. And leave all these tales about "import substitution". It already started in 2014. It's been 8 years.
      2. +9
        20 June 2022 21: 05
        Quote: Marine63
        (which is worth only their H-6 clone Tu-16)

        at the antipodes, the B-52 also flies on the original engines of the late 50s. And he will fly for at least another 10 years in connection with the decommissioning of the b-1. The Chinese have the latest subsonic bombers by the time of manufacture.
  10. +7
    20 June 2022 07: 39
    The MiG Corporation is obliged to save not China, but Russia, whose Air Force really needs both a light single-engine attack aircraft and a heavy attack aircraft capable of going out and solving problems in near space. I do not believe that this famous company cannot be saved.
    1. +2
      20 June 2022 13: 30
      Statements about nothing ... A light single-engine design bureau has already presented the Sukhoi Design Bureau (the same Su-75 Checkmate), and then, this craft immediately raised many questions, but now it is no longer remembered. About space you turned down. Nobody will do this now. Neither ours, nor the Americans. You probably don't know what's going on in the world?
    2. +2
      20 June 2022 16: 39
      The MiG Corporation is obliged to save not China, but Russia, whose Air Force is very much needed as a light single-engine strike aircraft

      And why is the MiG needed for this: does it know how to design light single-engine aircraft?
      1. -4
        20 June 2022 16: 54
        Quote: Negruz
        And why is the MiG needed for this: does it know how to design light single-engine aircraft?

        Is not it so? Before the appearance of the front-line MiG-29, he did just that, and very successfully
        1. +4
          20 June 2022 17: 01
          Is not it so? Before the appearance of the front-line MiG-29, he did just that, and very successfully
          Did someone else find the 60s in KB?

          Are you seriously?
          1. 0
            20 June 2022 17: 42
            Quote: Negruz
            Did someone else find the 60s in KB?

            Do you think that there are those who caught the 70s when the MiG-29 was created?
            1. +2
              20 June 2022 18: 06
              Do you think that there are those who caught the 70s when the MiG-29 was created?

              Please don't troll
              hi
              MiG-29 (35) are still being serviced and produced (I mean small batches) ....
              And Mig-31 too (and it is twin-engine) ....
              1. +3
                20 June 2022 18: 44
                Quote: Negruz
                Please don't troll

                I didn't start ... hi
                Quote: Negruz
                MiG-29 (35) are still being serviced and produced (I mean small batches) ....
                And Mig-31 too (and it is twin-engine) ....

                You know that they are twin-engine... Let's leave "31" and return to the light fighter.
                Now the most massive light fighter is the American F-16, and in its place, in the sense of the most massive, the F-35, also single-engine, is now taking its place.
                The experience of combat use shows that twin-engine MiGs have no advantages over single-engine F-16 in terms of reliability and survivability. The defeat of one engine 100% leads to the loss of the aircraft.
                1. 0
                  20 June 2022 18: 48
                  That's right ... And the MiG, as you rightly noted, was engaged in such aircraft 60 years ago ....
                  1. 0
                    20 June 2022 18: 52
                    Quote: Negruz
                    And the MiG, as you rightly noted, was engaged in such aircraft 60 years ago ....

                    And we need to give him the opportunity to do it now. There must be COMPETITION.
                    1. +1
                      20 June 2022 19: 01
                      And we need to give him the opportunity to do it now. There must be COMPETITION.

                      Debatable ....
                      First, you will have to swell a lot of money, time, effort, personnel, knowledge, and again money and again money to swell into the resuscitation of the MiG like a design bureau ....
                      And then, maybe (!) They will give a competitive result, in a topic in which they do not have a single (!) Competitive advantage...
                      F-35 designed the entire "collective West", Eurofighters - the collective EU ...
                      And only Russia, poor against their background, should produce "competition" ....

                      In short, unconvincing....
                      1. 0
                        27 June 2022 12: 57
                        Quote: Negruz
                        And we need to give him the opportunity to do it now. There must be COMPETITION.

                        Debatable ....
                        First, you will have to swell a lot of money, time, effort, personnel, knowledge, and again money and again money to swell into the resuscitation of the MiG like a design bureau ....
                        And then, maybe (!) They will give a competitive result, in a topic in which they do not have a single (!) Competitive advantage...
                        F-35 designed the entire "collective West", Eurofighters - the collective EU ...
                        And only Russia, poor against their background, should produce "competition" ....

                        In short, unconvincing....

                        Indeed, here are the fools, in general this competition is not needed! They ruined their civilian aviation industry and there are no problems! The beauty! Yes?!
                      2. 0
                        27 June 2022 17: 16
                        Indeed, here are the fools, in general this competition is not needed! They ruined their civilian aviation industry and there are no problems! The beauty! Yes?!

                        If you want to object something on the merits - you are welcome!
                        hi
                      3. 0
                        27 June 2022 19: 36
                        Quote: Negruz
                        Indeed, here are the fools, in general this competition is not needed! They ruined their civilian aviation industry and there are no problems! The beauty! Yes?!

                        If you want to object something on the merits - you are welcome!
                        hi

                        I don't see any point in talking to you anymore.
                      4. 0
                        27 June 2022 20: 01
                        I don't see any point in talking to you anymore.

                        I don't impose...
                        hi
                2. +1
                  20 June 2022 21: 11
                  In addition to defeat, there are also breakdowns. You can still fly over the sea on the 1st engine and land or eject next to your ship. mig-29k is the only carrier-based aircraft of the Russian Federation in the series.
                  f-18 is also twin-engine
                  1. +2
                    21 June 2022 04: 25
                    Quote: clou
                    f-18 is also twin-engine

                    And the F-35B and F-35C?
                3. 0
                  27 June 2022 11: 58
                  Quote: svp67
                  Quote: Negruz
                  Please don't troll

                  I didn't start ... hi
                  Quote: Negruz
                  MiG-29 (35) are still being serviced and produced (I mean small batches) ....
                  And Mig-31 too (and it is twin-engine) ....

                  You know that they are twin-engine... Let's leave "31" and return to the light fighter.
                  Now the most massive light fighter is the American F-16, and in its place, in the sense of the most massive, the F-35, also single-engine, is now taking its place.
                  The experience of combat use shows that twin-engine MiGs have no advantages over single-engine F-16 in terms of reliability and survivability. The defeat of one engine 100% leads to the loss of the aircraft.


                  After all, all the fools who made twin-engine cars! I will say that next time everyone will ask you how and what to do.
      2. 0
        24 June 2022 22: 44
        Quote: Negruz
        The MiG Corporation is obliged to save not China, but Russia, whose Air Force is very much needed as a light single-engine strike aircraft

        And why is the MiG needed for this: does it know how to design light single-engine aircraft?


        The best in the world. Try to say it's not.
        1. 0
          24 June 2022 23: 58
          And why is MiG needed for this: does he know how to design light single-engine aircraft?

          The best in the world. Try to say it's not.

          The thesis "the best in the world" was expressed by you ...
          Try to confirm it: please name all aircraft manufacturers and their "brainchildren" over the past 40 years (light single-engine fighters) ....
          Compare ...
          hi
          1. 0
            25 June 2022 14: 53
            You asked, you were answered. If you do not agree, you and prove the opposite.
            1. 0
              25 June 2022 15: 10
              The answer needs justification...
              "Because..." is not an option...
              hi
              1. 0
                25 June 2022 17: 26
                Quote: Negruz
                The answer needs justification...
                "Because..." is not an option...
                hi

                The manner of your question initially carried a negative message regarding the competencies of the MiG. Here you yourself this negative and justify.
                1. 0
                  25 June 2022 18: 23
                  The manner of your question initially carried a negative message regarding the competencies of the MiG. Here you yourself this negative and justify.

                  Manners are judged in the institutes of noble maidens....

                  My original question (self-quote):
                  does the MiG know how to design light single-engine aircraft?

                  Is it really for MiG fans that the very posing of such a question is a sin, negativity and bad manners?
                  hi
                  1. 0
                    25 June 2022 22: 12
                    Quote: Negruz
                    The manner of your question initially carried a negative message regarding the competencies of the MiG. Here you yourself this negative and justify.

                    Manners are judged in the institutes of noble maidens....

                    My original question (self-quote):
                    does the MiG know how to design light single-engine aircraft?

                    Is it really for MiG fans that the very posing of such a question is a sin, negativity and bad manners?
                    hi

                    And not only at the institute, and there is no need to include a fool that it was not so. This is first. Secondly, I recommend to refrain from unfounded negativity in someone's address.
                    1. 0
                      27 June 2022 19: 43
                      Secondly, I recommend to refrain from unfounded negativity in someone's address.

                      Thank you for the recommendation, but there is no need for it due to the lack of "unfounded negativity" ...
                      hi
  11. +10
    20 June 2022 07: 41
    Will China save MiG?

    Interestingly, in what form does the author present this salvation? ""Free of charge, that is, for nothing" will give money "and show a movie for free"?
    Or will he buy out a controlling stake in order to get to the MiG archives, patents, inventions and technologies, as he tried to do with MotorSich?
    The Chinese have already gnawed their playful hands up to their elbows that they didn’t redeem or steal all this in c
    1. +1
      24 June 2022 12: 43
      In addition, transferring such technologies to a neighboring country that pursues a policy of exclusively its own interests would be an additional negative factor in building our defense and in future foreign policy.
  12. 0
    20 June 2022 07: 43
    Did they forget to expel the American instructors from the country? And then after all, the gas station is even trying to fight! But I forgot about all the effective gaskets in power!
  13. +13
    20 June 2022 07: 47
    MiG-29SMT and MiG-35 differ from each other as well as Su-27SM and Su-35! And the engine of the MiG-35 has not smoked for a long time. The problem is that the price tag on the MiG-35 is the same as on the Su-35.
    1. +3
      20 June 2022 10: 25
      The problem is that the price tag on the MiG-35 is the same as on the Su-35.

      The MiG-35 is much cheaper, but it must be ordered not by six aircraft, but by 100, like the Su-35. It seems that his price is two times cheaper than that of the Su-35, if so, then it’s impossible not to order MiGs. It would be better to order the MiG-35 in a large series and put the Su-35 in the series instead of the Su-57. In any case, being left without a manufacturer of light fighters is a crime.
      1. -4
        20 June 2022 15: 04
        Quote: ramzay21
        The MiG-35 is much cheaper, but it must be ordered not by six aircraft, but by 100, like the Su-35.

        The composition of the MiG-35 and Su-35 is the same - only the weight and dimensions are different.
        Do you think a laptop should cost less than a desktop PC? And a comparable smartphone?
        1. +2
          20 June 2022 20: 57
          The composition of the MiG-35 and Su-35 is the same - only the weight and dimensions are different.

          An amazing conclusion that has nothing to do with reality. But in fact
          MiG-35 costs 45 million and Su-35 costs about 100 million. Prices from export contracts for both.
          The MiG-35 takes 5800 fuel and has a range of 3000 km, while the Su-35 takes 11500 fuel and flies 3600 km.
          Or do you think that 45 million dollars equals 100 million dollars, and the cost of 5800 kg of kerosene is equal to the cost of 11500 kg of kerosene?
      2. 0
        20 June 2022 16: 42
        In any case, being left without a manufacturer of light fighters is a crime.

        A light fighter cannot be twin-engine ....
        They "save" on the engine, tanks, fuselage ...
        1. +2
          20 June 2022 20: 51
          The whole world considers the MiG-29 a light fighter, except for the victims of Poghosyan's propaganda. The cost and maintenance of the MiG-35 is much cheaper and twin-engine has nothing to do with it. The MiG-35 takes 5800 fuel and has a range of 3000 km, while the Su-35 takes 11500 fuel and flies 3600 km. Do you see the difference between 5800 kg of fuel and 11500 kg, or is it the same thing in your opinion? Maybe they cost 5800 and 11500 the same?
          1. -1
            20 June 2022 20: 55
            The whole world, when they hear the term "light fighter", talks about the f-16, f-35, flu, and even the mirage 2000 (7,5 tons of empty versus 11 for the instant-29) ....
            And only the "fighters with the pogosyan" remember the MiG-29 ....
            Well, this is how people need to be "brainwashed" so that they consider a twin-engine aircraft to be "light" ...
            1. +4
              20 June 2022 21: 48
              You don’t know the history of aviation well, the American F-5 Freedom Fighter / Tiger II light fighter, namely light, twin-engine fighter.
              1. 0
                20 June 2022 21: 51
                It was a long time ago....
                Now the "descendant" of the Mirage-2000 - the "empty" Rafal weighs 10 tons, and "drags" up to 24,5 tons ....

                the "empty" 11-ton "light fighter" Mig-29 lifts up to 18,5 tons on two engines ....

                Less arrogance in communication ....
                1. +3
                  20 June 2022 21: 59
                  Firstly, Rafal two Turbofan engines, secondly, why are your comparisons without logic and clarity, empty weight or full, I can’t catch your wave.
                  Thirdly, there is no arrogance, but a logical question on the topic, but it takes you into the wilds.
                  And the last thing, do not be afraid to ask or discuss on this forum, it was created for this.
                  1. -2
                    20 June 2022 22: 23
                    Rafal has two, I know ....

                    Arrogance in "You don't know the history of aviation well": who are you, exactly?

                    but a logical question on the topic, but it takes you into the wilds.

                    No questions found in your comment.
                    American light fighter F-5 "Freedom Fighter" / "Tiger" II, namely a light, twin-engine fighter.


                    On the subject: F-5 - an aircraft that began to be designed in the late 50s ...
                    Maybe it's not worth it to "plunge" so far into the "gray old days"?
            2. -1
              21 June 2022 01: 24
              The whole world, when they hear the term "light fighter", talks about the f-16, f-35, flu, and even the mirage 2000 (7,5 tons of empty versus 11 for the instant-29) ....

              Once again, especially for you. Is there a difference in 5800 kg of fuel and 11500 kg of fuel that two planes use to fly the same distance?
              This is a very simple question.
              Well, this is how people need to be "brainwashed" so that they consider a twin-engine aircraft to be "light" ...

              And what's the difference how many engines a light fighter has if it consumes half as much fuel as a heavy fighter, Poghosyan's admirer?
              1. 0
                21 June 2022 01: 39
                The difference in weight and payload....
                Here is a comparison of four aircraft: mirage-2000 (1 engine), mig-29 (2 engines), j-10 (1 engine), rafal (2 engines); the first digit is the empty weight, the second is the maximum takeoff weight (in tons):
                7,5/17
                11/18,5
                9/20
                10/24,5

                What caught your eye?
                1. +4
                  21 June 2022 03: 46
                  What's the difference between one engine or two? A light fighter is, first of all, a lower cost and lower costs for an aircraft with acceptable characteristics.
                  If instead of hundreds of Su-35s you can buy and operate two hundred MiG-35s at the same price as one hundred Su-35s, then you will have twice as many aircraft.
                  Now in the NWO, the use of the Su-35 is redundant, he is at war with the MiG-29, which the MiG-35 could perfectly handle, only there would be TWO TIMES MORE and at the same price. You can understand this, and not go into demagogy about the weight of the aircraft and the number of engines that do not solve anything.
                  1. 0
                    21 June 2022 11: 47
                    No difference?

                    That is, do you think that a single-engine j-10 is more expensive, consumes more fuel and carries fewer weapons than the Mig-29?
                    1. +1
                      21 June 2022 12: 23
                      And do not talk about prices in the context of "2 to 1" ....
                      The price for a moment-35 is the same as for dry ...
                      This is your personal fantasy that "2 to 1", that should be, but this ratio does not exist anywhere in the world even when comparing a heavy twin-engine and light single-engine fighter (not to mention the twin-engine MiG-29), and I can even say why ....
                      1. 0
                        21 June 2022 19: 20
                        It's your personal fantasy that "2 to 1"

                        If in your world 5800 kg of kerosene costs the same as 11500 kg, and 45 million equals 100, then I can't help you.
                    2. -1
                      21 June 2022 19: 15
                      That is, do you think that a single-engine j-10 is more expensive, consumes more fuel and carries fewer weapons than the Mig-29?

                      There is no J-10 or F-35 in the VKS, there is ONLY the Su-35 in the VKS and it is TWICE EXPENSIVE and consumes TWO TIMES MORE FUEL
                      1. +3
                        21 June 2022 19: 44
                        If in your world 5800 kg of kerosene costs the same as 11500 kg, and 45 million equals 100, then I can't help you.

                        Specify information from "your world", because the su-35 does NOT cost 100 million, and the cost of the mig-35 was 45 million in prices 2011 of the year...
                        Su-35 and he ... consumes TWICE MORE FUEL

                        Wrong, because it flies even faster, higher and farther, carries a BIG payload and has more weapons hardpoints ....

                        Fuel efficiency is calculated not "on the forehead", but taking into account the unit of speed of delivery of a kilogram of payload per kilometer of distance ....
                      2. -1
                        22 June 2022 08: 34
                        Specify information from "your world", because the su-35 does NOT cost 100 million, and the cost of the mig-35 was 45 million in 2011 prices.

                        These are the costs in export contracts, the price for the HQS is a state secret.
                        $45 million for the MiG-35 is the contract price for the Indian Air Force. 100 million for the Su-35 is the price in the contract with Indonesia.
                        Wrong, because it flies even faster, higher and farther, carries a BIG payload and has more weapons hardpoints ....

                        If you read what I wrote or looked at the characteristics yourself, you would see that the flight range of both is approximately the same, I gave the numbers above.
                        Two MiG-35s carry more weapons than one Su-35 and can solve more tasks, in addition, most combat missions do not require such a combat load as the Su-35, and then the use of the MiG-35 is more reasonable. Moreover, the MiG-35 has a more modern radar than the Su-35
                      3. +1
                        22 June 2022 18: 47
                        These are the costs in export contracts, the price for the HQS is a state secret.
                        $45 million for the MiG-35 is the contract price for the Indian Air Force. 100 million for the Su-35 is the price in the contract with Indonesia.

                        India contract not signed, and Indonesia wanted planes with service...
                        The cost of the Su-35 for the Aerospace Forces is 2 billion rubles apiece ....
                        I would sell you for export for 200 million tanks per unit, but there are two problems:
                        - I don't have planes;
                        - You don't have any money...
                        If you read what I wrote or looked at the characteristics yourself, you would see that the flight range of both is approximately the same, I gave the numbers above.

                        Nothing of the kind, I don’t comment on your fantasies at all - the range of the MiG-35 is less ...
                        Two MiG-35s carry more weapons than one Su-35 and can solve more tasks, in addition, most combat missions do not require such a combat load as the Su-35, and then the use of the MiG-35 is more reasonable.

                        Again these stories from "2 to 1" ....
                        And that's not even counting the fact that you need two pilots, two service crews, two caponiers at the airfield, two spare parts, and so on ....

                        Thus, the MiG -35 is not a "cheap light fighter" paired with an "expensive heavy one", but an expensive light or weak heavy fighter, that is, the MiG -35 is inefficient neither in terms of production and maintenance costs, nor in terms of combat use .......
                      4. 0
                        24 June 2022 22: 29
                        Quote: Negruz
                        These are the costs in export contracts, the price for the HQS is a state secret.
                        $45 million for the MiG-35 is the contract price for the Indian Air Force. 100 million for the Su-35 is the price in the contract with Indonesia.

                        India contract not signed, and Indonesia wanted planes with service...
                        The cost of the Su-35 for the Aerospace Forces is 2 billion rubles apiece ....
                        I would sell you for export for 200 million tanks per unit, but there are two problems:
                        - I don't have planes;
                        - You don't have any money...
                        If you read what I wrote or looked at the characteristics yourself, you would see that the flight range of both is approximately the same, I gave the numbers above.

                        Nothing of the kind, I don’t comment on your fantasies at all - the range of the MiG-35 is less ...
                        Two MiG-35s carry more weapons than one Su-35 and can solve more tasks, in addition, most combat missions do not require such a combat load as the Su-35, and then the use of the MiG-35 is more reasonable.

                        Again these stories from "2 to 1" ....
                        And that's not even counting the fact that you need two pilots, two service crews, two caponiers at the airfield, two spare parts, and so on ....

                        Thus, the MiG -35 is not a "cheap light fighter" paired with an "expensive heavy one", but an expensive light or weak heavy fighter, that is, the MiG -35 is inefficient neither in terms of production and maintenance costs, nor in terms of combat use .......

                        Do you have any information about the combat use of the MiG-35? Regarding the price of the Su-35. Can you name the price of this aircraft which you think is correct?
                      5. 0
                        24 June 2022 22: 40
                        Regarding the price of the Su-35. Can you name the price of this aircraft which you think is correct?

                        Actually, I already called - if you read carefully ...
                        hi
                      6. 0
                        24 June 2022 23: 15
                        Quote: Negruz
                        Regarding the price of the Su-35. Can you name the price of this aircraft which you think is correct?

                        Actually, I already called - if you read carefully ...
                        hi

                        I can't find something. Tell me if you don't mind.
                      7. 0
                        24 June 2022 23: 48
                        I can't find something. Tell me if you don't mind.
                        See the text of the dialogue, 2 billion rubles....
                      8. 0
                        25 June 2022 15: 13
                        Quote: Negruz
                        I can't find something. Tell me if you don't mind.
                        See the text of the dialogue, 2 billion rubles....

                        You named this price for the Aerospace Forces, it remains to find out the price of the MiG-35 for them. Maybe you know?
                      9. 0
                        25 June 2022 15: 17
                        You named this price for the Aerospace Forces, it remains to find out the price of the MiG-35 for them. Maybe you know?
                        6 aircraft built - look for ...
                        By the way, the price for a moment-35 is, in principle, conditional - foreign customers did not buy it ...
                        hi
                      10. 0
                        25 June 2022 17: 35
                        Quote: Negruz
                        You named this price for the Aerospace Forces, it remains to find out the price of the MiG-35 for them. Maybe you know?
                        6 aircraft built - look for ...
                        By the way, the price for a moment-35 is, in principle, conditional - foreign customers did not buy it ...
                        hi

                        So you don't know. Maybe you at least know the prices of the Su-35 and MiG-35 for external contracts? Is it necessary to compare something somehow, or will you again rush about and shy away from constructive comparison?
                      11. 0
                        25 June 2022 18: 14
                        So you don't know. Can at least you know Su-35 and MiG-35 prices for external contracts? Compare what you need or you again you will rush about and evade constructive comparison?

                        Do you think trolling "gets" me?)
                        Nothing will come of it: the user Ramsay appeared here with the numbers, conduct a dialogue with him....

                        The fact that the Mig-35 is not taken abroad and therefore the prices for deliveries under UN-concluded contracts are NOT known - it’s not a question for me ...

                        The initial thesis of my opponent was about 2 to 1 in the cost of two aircraft ....
                        He could not substantiate his point of view, maybe you can do it?
                        These are your theses: I do not intend to do YOUR work for YOU ...
                        hi
                      12. 0
                        25 June 2022 22: 46
                        Quote: Negruz
                        So you don't know. Can at least you know Su-35 and MiG-35 prices for external contracts? Compare what you need or you again you will rush about and evade constructive comparison?

                        Do you think trolling "gets" me?)
                        Nothing will come of it: the user Ramsay appeared here with the numbers, conduct a dialogue with him....

                        The fact that the Mig-35 is not taken abroad and therefore the prices for deliveries under UN-concluded contracts are NOT known - it’s not a question for me ...

                        The initial thesis of my opponent was about 2 to 1 in the cost of two aircraft ....
                        He could not substantiate his point of view, maybe you can do it?
                        These are your theses: I do not intend to do YOUR work for YOU ...
                        hi

                        You at least name the price for external contracts for the su-35, since they take it. And without numbers, talking when it comes to comparison is not constructive. You made it very clear that the MiG-35 is a weak and inefficient aircraft. These were your words.
                      13. 0
                        27 June 2022 17: 21
                        You at least name the price for external contracts for the su-35, since they take it. And without numbers, talking when it comes to comparison is not constructive.

                        Ramsay and I exchanged views on this issue - you can express their thoughts and numbers...
                        hi
                        You made it very clear that the MiG-35 is a weak and inefficient aircraft. Those were your words

                        No, these are not my words: these are your words that you want to attribute to me...
                        hi
                      14. 0
                        27 June 2022 18: 13
                        Quote: Negruz
                        These are the costs in export contracts, the price for the HQS is a state secret.
                        $45 million for the MiG-35 is the contract price for the Indian Air Force. 100 million for the Su-35 is the price in the contract with Indonesia.

                        India contract not signed, and Indonesia wanted planes with service...
                        The cost of the Su-35 for the Aerospace Forces is 2 billion rubles apiece ....
                        I would sell you for export for 200 million tanks per unit, but there are two problems:
                        - I don't have planes;
                        - You don't have any money...
                        If you read what I wrote or looked at the characteristics yourself, you would see that the flight range of both is approximately the same, I gave the numbers above.

                        Nothing of the kind, I don’t comment on your fantasies at all - the range of the MiG-35 is less ...
                        Two MiG-35s carry more weapons than one Su-35 and can solve more tasks, in addition, most combat missions do not require such a combat load as the Su-35, and then the use of the MiG-35 is more reasonable.

                        Again these stories from "2 to 1" ....
                        And that's not even counting the fact that you need two pilots, two service crews, two caponiers at the airfield, two spare parts, and so on ....

                        Thus, the MiG -35 is not a "cheap light fighter" paired with an "expensive heavy one", but an expensive light or weak heavy fighter, that is, the MiG -35 is inefficient neither in terms of production and maintenance costs, nor in terms of combat use .......

                        Read above what you wrote about the effectiveness of the MiG-35. Now turn on the back. This is no longer surprising, and I have already formulated my opinion regarding you.
                      15. 0
                        27 June 2022 18: 15
                        Read above what you wrote about the effectiveness of the MiG-35. Now turn on the back. This is no longer surprising, and I have already formulated my opinion regarding you.

                        I remember and read...
                        Nothing like this ...
                      16. 0
                        27 June 2022 19: 42
                        Quote: Negruz
                        Read above what you wrote about the effectiveness of the MiG-35. Now turn on the back. This is no longer surprising, and I have already formulated my opinion regarding you.

                        I remember and read...
                        Nothing like this ...

                        Are you a woman?)
                      17. 0
                        27 June 2022 20: 02
                        Are you a woman?)

                        Not....
                  2. 0
                    20 July 2022 18: 59
                    Quote: ramzay21
                    only there would be TWO TIMES MORE

                    You amaze me. Ukraine f-15, and all the advantage of both the Su and the MiG-35 will come to naught.
                    1. +1
                      20 July 2022 23: 08
                      You amaze me. Where is it even more? For roughly 15 Ukrainian flying ones?

                      In fact, Ukrainian aircraft have not yet been destroyed and fly, among other things, due to the small number of our aviation and the lack of AWACS aircraft, there is a front line of more than a thousand kilometers and hundreds of Su-35s are clearly not enough to provide air cover for it, but they need more and other places in our country to guard.

                      In addition, all the same Su-35s must also deliver strikes against ground targets, their air defense is still working, and equipment moves freely in a shallow rear just because we do not have enough of the same MiG-35s or Su-35s and there are no RTR aircraft and reconnaissance, detecting ground targets.
                      And by the way, the Su 35 has an advantage over instants, not thanks to 2 engines, but thanks to a more advanced radar.

                      In fact, the MiG-35 has a radar with AFAR Zhuk, which is more advanced than the PFAR Irbis of the Su-35. And the biggest problem of the MiG-35 is that a couple of years ago, NPO Fazatron, the manufacturer and developer of the Zhuk AFAR radar, was destroyed, some of our patriots needed a good site in Moscow, where this enterprise was located.
                      Tomorrow f-16s will appear in Ukraine, and all the advantage of both the Su and the MiG-35 will come to naught.

                      The F-16 has no advantages over the Su-35 or MiG-35, but even the MiG-29 has advantages if it carries AIM-120 missiles and is aimed at the target by AWACS, and even the Su-57 is powerless against such a bunch. This is how all the MiG-29s of the Yugoslav Air Force were shot down, the pilots of which did not understand where the missiles were coming from. But in our Aerospace Forces this experience is not studied, so as not to frighten our pilots, we still do not have AWACS aircraft and are not expected to.
                2. 0
                  24 June 2022 22: 37
                  Quote: Negruz
                  The difference in weight and payload....
                  Here is a comparison of four aircraft: mirage-2000 (1 engine), mig-29 (2 engines), j-10 (1 engine), rafal (2 engines); the first digit is the empty weight, the second is the maximum takeoff weight (in tons):
                  7,5/17
                  11/18,5
                  9/20
                  10/24,5

                  What caught your eye?

                  Excellent performance TWO-engine Rafal. And you?
                  1. 0
                    24 June 2022 22: 43
                    Excellent performance TWO-engine Rafal. And you?

                    Chic, because Rafal won the MiG in the Indian tender ....
                    Although the price, for my taste, is too high for the Rafal ... But perhaps this is due to the wide range of weapons and the platform for its integration ...
                    1. 0
                      24 June 2022 23: 11
                      Quote: Negruz
                      Excellent performance TWO-engine Rafal. And you?

                      Chic, because Rafal won the MiG in the Indian tender ....
                      Although the price, for my taste, is too high for the Rafal ... But perhaps this is due to the wide range of weapons and the platform for its integration ...

                      Rafal won a couple more times and the su-35
                      1. 0
                        24 June 2022 23: 49
                        Rafal won a couple more times and the su-35

                        I have not heard, but I will not argue
                        hi
                    2. 0
                      20 July 2022 19: 00
                      Quote: Negruz
                      Excellent performance TWO-engine Rafal. And you?

                      Chic, because Rafal won the MiG in the Indian tender ....
                      Although the price, for my taste, is too high for the Rafal ... But perhaps this is due to the wide range of weapons and the platform for its integration ...

                      Do not heat the Indian, do not respect yourself.
            3. +1
              24 June 2022 22: 20
              Quote: Negruz
              The whole world, when they hear the term "light fighter", talks about the f-16, f-35, flu, and even the mirage 2000 (7,5 tons of empty versus 11 for the instant-29) ....
              And only the "fighters with the pogosyan" remember the MiG-29 ....
              Well, this is how people need to be "brainwashed" so that they consider a twin-engine aircraft to be "light" ...

              By what criterion do you yourself determine the "lightness" of a fighter? By weight or number of engines? Or are you rushing about the situation?
              1. -1
                24 June 2022 22: 44
                By what criterion do you yourself determine the "lightness" of a fighter? By weight or number of engines? Or are you rushing about the situation?

                No throwing - only a ONE-engine fighter is light ....
                1. +1
                  25 June 2022 15: 52
                  Quote: Negruz
                  By what criterion do you yourself determine the "lightness" of a fighter? By weight or number of engines? Or are you rushing about the situation?

                  No throwing - only a ONE-engine fighter is light ....

                  Bravo! Great choice!)) And since you switched to the system for measuring the "severity" of a fighter in "parrots", excuse me, by the number of engines, then compare the same Rafal and F-35A / C and tell me which of them is lighter or heavier. I hope you know their maximum takeoff weights. I just ask you right away, do not rush about and justify your system "in parrots."
                  1. -2
                    25 June 2022 18: 16
                    Everything is clear; Rafal is a heavy fighter of the 4th generation, f-35 is a light fighter of the 5th generation ...
                    hi
                    1. 0
                      25 June 2022 23: 09
                      Well, that's the expected answer. Even very familiar - but "in parrots" it is much "heavier"))) You either really don’t see the forest for the trees, or you are a hostage to dogmas and your own verbiage. With what I congratulate you!
                      1. 0
                        27 June 2022 17: 23
                        Well, that's the expected answer. Even very familiar - but "in parrots" it is much "heavier"))) You either really don’t see the forest for the trees, or you are a hostage to dogmas and your own verbiage. With what I congratulate you!

                        My answer is very clear, but it looks like you are already starting to get carried away ...
                        For the May registration of this year - especially...
                        hi
  14. +3
    20 June 2022 08: 06
    Either you need to change the leadership to zero, or close it. The corporation itself will not get out of such a swamp.
    1. 0
      20 June 2022 15: 14
      Quote: Arkady007
      the corporation itself is no longer

      You have an outdated world view....
      MiG Corporation is long gone. There is a MiG design bureau in the UAC (combined aviation corp.).
      There are still some traditions in managing projects with which experience has been gained, but already different design bureaus can receive tasks for a common project. Projects are differentiated only by the functionality of the product (fighters, bombers, transporters, passenger, ....).
      1. -3
        20 June 2022 16: 23
        The essence does not change from the name.
        A swamp is a swamp, and in fact, like throughout the country. We need to change everything fundamentally. We need an economic revolution.
        We need a state idea. We need a slogan. Need a goal.
  15. The comment was deleted.
  16. Eug
    +2
    20 June 2022 08: 41
    "Hump" appeared on the MiG - 29 13, back in the late 80s - early 90s.
    1. Eug
      +1
      20 June 2022 09: 34
      Rather, on the MiG-29 9-13.
  17. The comment was deleted.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  18. +4
    20 June 2022 09: 28
    After all, the "same" MiG-35 was already equipped with a radar with AFAR at the beginning of the games with the Indians

    But what kind of AFAR was and who is its manufacturer is a big question

    The fact that China needs such a missile carrier was said by many high-ranking representatives of both the party and the Ministry of Defense. And there is an opinion that it is the MiG-31 that is what is needed, because there is simply no other alternative in the modern aviation market.

    A missile carrier is needed, but whether Mig has all the documentation for it and its production remains a big question, at least for the same (D-30F6)

    All in all, we don't have much time left to see how things actually happen. But something tells me that a miracle should not be expected.

    She de facto went down in history from the beginning of the 90s of the last century, now it is a dead design bureau
    1. -2
      20 June 2022 10: 16
      But what kind of AFAR was and who is its manufacturer is a big question

      AFAR Zhuk is the manufacturer of Fazatron, but its zaputinites had already been bombed, the building was demolished in 2020, the employees fled, they had a large plot in a good place in Moscow and a world name that our authorities don’t care about.
      She de facto went down in history from the beginning of the 90s of the last century, now it is a dead design bureau

      The MiG went down in history after Pogosyan pulled all the funding over to himself and at the same time the smart employees from the MiG in the early 2000s, he was in great favor with the GDP, and now we will be left without light fighters, other such only with heavy fighters in the world no.
      1. +6
        20 June 2022 11: 43
        AFAR Zhuk is the manufacturer of Fazatron, but its zaputinites had already been bombed, the building was demolished in 2020, the employees fled, they had a large plot in a good place in Moscow and a world name that our authorities don’t care about.

        Judging by the number of AFARs on our aircraft (at least on the SU, at least on the MiG), this was a single development created not on a domestic basis, which could not be put into production. For Zaputintsy and other liberals are not only Phasatron, but our entire electronics industry for 30 years. So, as if AFAR on our fighters is not a pipe dream

        The MiG went down in history after Pogosyan pulled all the funding over to himself and at the same time the smart employees from the MiG in the early 2000s, he was in great favor with the GDP, and now we will be left without light fighters, other such only with heavy fighters in the world no.

        Even before the beginning of the 29s, Mig did not have a light fighter (Mig 30 does not belong to this in any way) and XNUMX years after the collapse, the MiG design bureau did not come close to its creation, and now there is simply no point in continuing the existence of this design bureau
        1. -5
          20 June 2022 21: 26
          Judging by the number of AFARs on our aircraft (at least on the SU, at least on the MiG), this was a single development created not on a domestic basis, which could not be put into production.

          This is a completely domestic development and it was produced at the Fazatron enterprise, in a building that was demolished 2 years ago. This enterprise produced avionics in much larger quantities under the USSR and could produce them now. It’s just that someone pulled off a criminal scheme and the strategic enterprise was gone, it’s impossible to produce MiG without a radar, so the destruction of the Phazatron by the Zaputins contributed to the destruction of the MiG. Thanks to Putin.
          Mig did not have a light fighter even before the start of the XNUMXs

          Just because you don't know doesn't mean it's a fact. In 2000, a promising 1.44 fighter took off, which showed excellent results and which was ruined by the same Poghosyan. It was twin-engine, but on its basis a single-engine version was developed with the AL-41 engine, which are now on the Su-57 and Su-35. This set back the creation of the 20th generation light fighter by 5 years.
          Yes, and the MiG-35 is a good plane and would obviously come in handy now, but it also became a victim of undercover games and crimes.
        2. The comment was deleted.
        3. 0
          26 June 2022 12: 10
          Quote: spektr9
          AFAR Zhuk is the manufacturer of Fazatron, but its zaputinites had already been bombed, the building was demolished in 2020, the employees fled, they had a large plot in a good place in Moscow and a world name that our authorities don’t care about.

          Judging by the number of AFARs on our aircraft (at least on the SU, at least on the MiG), this was a single development created not on a domestic basis, which could not be put into production. For Zaputintsy and other liberals are not only Phasatron, but our entire electronics industry for 30 years. So, as if AFAR on our fighters is not a pipe dream

          The MiG went down in history after Pogosyan pulled all the funding over to himself and at the same time the smart employees from the MiG in the early 2000s, he was in great favor with the GDP, and now we will be left without light fighters, other such only with heavy fighters in the world no.

          Even before the beginning of the 29s, Mig did not have a light fighter (Mig 30 does not belong to this in any way) and XNUMX years after the collapse, the MiG design bureau did not come close to its creation, and now there is simply no point in continuing the existence of this design bureau

          How, excuse me, do you measure the "gravity" of a fighter?
      2. +5
        20 June 2022 16: 46
        The MiG went down in history after Pogosyan pulled all the funding over to himself and at the same time the smart employees from the MiG in the early 2000s, he was in great favor with the GDP, and now we will be left without light fighters, other such only with heavy fighters in the world no.
        In the 90s, Pogosyan mastered China and India with the Su-30, and in a moment he mastered Moscow flea markets ...
        At the beginning of the 27s, Putin gave money to resume the production of the Su-29 and MiG-XNUMX for the Russian Air Force ...
        Bottom line: dry income embodied in the su-35, MiG - proip ... al ....
        1. 0
          26 June 2022 12: 18
          Quote: Negruz
          The MiG went down in history after Pogosyan pulled all the funding over to himself and at the same time the smart employees from the MiG in the early 2000s, he was in great favor with the GDP, and now we will be left without light fighters, other such only with heavy fighters in the world no.
          In the 90s, Pogosyan mastered China and India with the Su-30, and in a moment he mastered Moscow flea markets ...
          At the beginning of the 27s, Putin gave money to resume the production of the Su-29 and MiG-XNUMX for the Russian Air Force ...
          Bottom line: dry income embodied in the su-35, MiG - proip ... al ....

          Excuse me, are you a close friend of Pogosyan, Putin, Kudrin and the heads of Moscow flea markets of the 90s? Where did you get such awareness? Maybe you managed to work everywhere as a big boss?
          1. 0
            26 June 2022 15: 03
            Excuse me, are you a close friend of Pogosyan, Putin, Kudrin and the heads of Moscow flea markets of the 90s? Where did you get such awareness? Maybe you managed to work everywhere as a big boss?

            That's it, the arguments are over?))
    2. +2
      20 June 2022 12: 30
      After all, the "same" MiG-35 was already equipped with a radar with AFAR at the beginning of the games with the Indians. So it's not about electronics. The point is an outdated airframe and frankly old and inefficient engines.

      The fact is that that moment-35 was not in service anywhere, moreover, it was not even a prototype, but rather a concept.
      It would be strange if the Indians would choose a non-existent aircraft as the winner of the tender, which, in case of victory, would begin to bring to mind.
    3. -7
      20 June 2022 13: 26
      China can simply order our designers to develop their own "three-wing". They have already ordered the development of a helicopter and an airliner. The Chinese still have an acute question of technology. They themselves can only produce clones of our Su-27s, An-8/12/24s, Tu-16s and MiG-21s, as well as mediocre aircraft like the J-10, or variations on the very old MiG-21. So far, they have not been able to do anything more modern ... the language does not dare to call their J-20 and JC-31 modern. And they have problems with engines. They cannot create a modern aircraft engine themselves, so they buy from us. In short, questions... questions... questions...
  19. +2
    20 June 2022 09: 31
    And will they be able to resume production in an instant 31 from scratch, even if the same China orders a large batch? It is one thing to modernize, it is quite another to produce.
  20. 0
    20 June 2022 09: 45
    MIG may receive an order to develop a promising interceptor-carrier of hypersonic missiles to replace the MIG-31. In the end, this may be enough to keep the competencies and the enterprise.
    1. +1
      20 June 2022 12: 36
      Do you really think that competent personnel are still preserved there? They have not really developed anything new over the past couple of decades.
      In fact, instant 35 is a modernization of 29.
      Gone are the days for the MiG when designers like Mikoyan designed hundreds of aircraft in their careers.
  21. -3
    20 June 2022 10: 08
    The MiG-35 is exactly the same modernization of the MiG-29 as the Su-35 of the Su-27 aircraft, and these are aircraft of different classes, and the radar with AFAR Zhuk MiG-35 is more modern than the Irbis Su-35. The MiG-35 is needed by our Aerospace Forces to replace the MiG-29, and to remain only with heavy fighters is a betrayal.
    Especially for idiots who are used to jumping on a rake and not learning anything. China will not solve anyone's problems, it is interested in technology and employees, and not traitors like ours sit in the leadership of China.
    The MiG began to destroy the pest named Pogosyan, it was he who pulled over all state funding and pulled over all the smart employees, launching a company with a world name and serious experience around the world.
    1. +2
      20 June 2022 10: 45
      It's all your pests' fault, oga. And not the fact that for the RSFSR the MiGs had too short a range, but most of the MiGs went to Ukraine. Well, you just need to understand that to produce a zoo of aircraft, when the basis is SS 27, SS 30, SS 35, is at least stupid. And to rivet a fighter that would be just like that is stupid. Now, if it were compatible in terms of components and spare parts with dryers, then yes, And so the Mig is superfluous in the current situation. And our lightest one will most likely be the SU 75, because it promises to be compatible in many parts with the SU 35 and su57
    2. +1
      20 June 2022 15: 29
      Quote: ramzay21
      The MiG-35 is needed by our Aerospace Forces to replace the MiG-29, and to remain only with heavy fighters is a betrayal.

      The experience of Syria has shown that in the conditions of sparsely located air bases, the MiG29 / 35 has an insufficient radius and the number of weapons. In Ukraine, the range of airfields from the front line should be more than 100 km (300 km). This drastically reduces the time spent in the duty / combat zone of the MiGs.
      And yes, the appearance of the modern Su-75, unified with the Su-57 (common materials, parts, equipment and weapons), completely puts an end to the MiG-35.
      1. +1
        20 June 2022 17: 21
        This was understood in the Russian Air Force back in the 90s, and commentators on VO have not understood it yet ...
  22. 0
    20 June 2022 10: 33
    Lord! This is sho ... on the MiG they finally decided to put an end to ... big and heavy? Abysmal, you understand! I was waiting for the MiG-41! Shaw will be with him now ... or, more precisely, will not be? winked
    1. -1
      20 June 2022 15: 36
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      I was waiting for the MiG-41! What will happen to him now...

      Take it easy!
      Right now they are pilling him and they will already pump him out.
    2. +1
      20 June 2022 16: 18
      Quote: Nikolaevich I
      I was waiting for the MiG-41
      Why do you need him? What was he supposed to do that the Su-57 cannot?
      1. 0
        20 June 2022 16: 38
        Duc, they promised that he would fly in "near space" at a speed of 4 M ...! recourse But they didn’t promise about the Su-57! stop
        1. +5
          20 June 2022 16: 48
          To fly in near space, you need 24M, not 4. Going beyond 3M entails completely unreasonable hemorrhoids. Here the MiG-25 flew at a speed of 2.85M, was made of steel, flew on kerosene and could be used as a combat aircraft. SR-71 flew at a speed of 3M. The price was a titanium case, refueling in the air (fuel leaked on the ground), expensive and poisonous fuel (and the fuel that was made for the Valkyrie could only be disposed of in the mid-80s - poisonous muck without reasonable means of neutralization), the flight preparation time - a week, the flight itself - along a very accurate trajectory, etc. At 4M, everything will be even worse, and there will be no special advantages: the rocket will catch up anyway.
          1. +3
            20 June 2022 17: 20
            What are you saying to me? You tell it to those who promised me all this! recourse
          2. -3
            20 June 2022 18: 18
            There is evidence that the 25th and 3500 gave.
            1. +3
              20 June 2022 19: 04
              In a dive, and a one-time one, it has limitations on the glazing temperature, a maximum of 9 minutes, unlike the SR-71 Black Bird, what 3500 km / h !!!
              1. 0
                21 June 2022 14: 03
                These are old, maybe hunting stories, I don’t argue. The fact that this could be a short-term regime is undeniable, of course.
  23. +2
    20 June 2022 11: 00
    "Will China save the MiG?" Fuck... Stop this world, I'll get off.
  24. -1
    20 June 2022 11: 12
    The situation is very strange, given the current position of the Russian Federation in the world and the huge ambitions of the authorities. Destroying concerns that are well-known in the world is either betrayal or stupidity, or maybe all at the same time. You can always find a local designer or an offended foreign genius. That would be the goal. But the authorities of the Russian Federation always go their own way, the most costly way.
    1. 0
      20 June 2022 21: 31
      Putin and his team also destroyed our civilian aviation industry and are now trying to frantically restore what has been destroyed for two decades, only to break not to build.
  25. +2
    20 June 2022 11: 16
    Interesting! The topic was raised, but it is not clear - does the author have indisputable data, for asserting, about such a desire of China?
  26. -1
    20 June 2022 11: 32
    IMHO, no comments will solve anything.
    Effective managers have already steered both IL and MIG, and brought them to problems.
    Again, the same authorities can save firms, which they brought to the handle, but .... do they need it?

    They poke a finger - it is necessary, they do not poke a finger - it is not necessary. In any case, we need billions from the budget ...
  27. -2
    20 June 2022 11: 47
    Sooner or later, Russia will be forced to build aircraft carriers and the MiG-35 would fit into the role of a carrier-based vehicle. This is an analogue of f-18. A niche car, but it actually exists in metal, and this is a big plus. No VTOL aircraft can compare with it in terms of efficiency. Therefore, limited production must be maintained.
    1. +5
      20 June 2022 14: 50
      The MiG-35 is not an analogue of the F-18, especially the F-18E block lll, and was not even close, read and compare the REO, and this is the main thing for today and then the composition of weapons.
  28. +3
    20 June 2022 12: 26
    China is showing interest in the MiG-31.

    In the Russian Federation itself, it is already being replaced by the Su35S and Su57 ..... China has its own 5th generation fighter, which is quite heavy. It is unlikely that at the current prices for the 5th generation and despite the fact that they are armed with AFAR and long-range missiles, it is necessary to make a specialized air defense aircraft ...
  29. +7
    20 June 2022 12: 59
    The problem is that if the MiG disappears. That SU will become a virtual monopolist in the domestic market of jet fighters. The yak has not been going further than training models for a long time. MiG is about to collapse. And only Su plants and develops.
    But a monopoly can lead to problems. For example, a price increase.
  30. +3
    20 June 2022 13: 19
    "... the merger of the Su and MiG aviation concerns, because they understood that the aircraft manufacturers of these firms made such different aircraft that the crossing of the" hedgehog and snake "looked more than doubtful."
    The question itself is questionable.
    And what if these two companies made different aircraft? What kind of "hedgehog" and "already" are there. If an aircraft manufacturing company and an agricultural company united, then such an allegory would be appropriate.
    There are many examples in the world when one company produces generally different products. For example, Volvo makes both trucks and cars. Hyundai and DEU make both passenger cars and various construction equipment, excavators, trucks, etc.
  31. +2
    20 June 2022 13: 21
    There is a lot of talk about the MiG-31 ... but in fact the remaining pepelats fly to their own, and no one is going to release them again. Talk about the "obsolescence" of the aircraft is not relevant. There is no alternative to its airframe and engines, and no alternative is foreseen. There is nothing in return. And it's not expected. Moreover, the airframe and engines are still good, you just need to update the "board". You can repair old planes as much as you like, but someday they will have to be written off. How then to protect the border, and why launch the Iskander ... sorry, "Daggers"? There is no other platform for them either.
  32. -5
    20 June 2022 13: 38
    If we discard all "persuasion", and look at the technical characteristics, then the MiG-35 is a really good car, the fifth generation. And cheap.

    As the war on the outskirts shows, a cheap plane - when there are a lot of them - is much more efficient than an expensive one, and especially when there are few of them - because of the same high cost. Well, a cheap 5th generation aircraft - it has no price. And the fact that Russia did not order cheap small planes (and did not show due interest = financing) from its manufacturer is NOT A QUALITY INDICATOR OF THE AIRCRAFT AT ALL. From the word GENERALLY. Let's remember (and we won't go back to this) a fresh story with ships... This is closer to the hidden military secret with the score in the Cayman Islands.

    The potential for modernization... Listen (with a short chuckle, it's so fashionable to start now)... Soon, in general, aircraft of this type and class will be junk. With or without potential.

    Here I am officially (with a personal photograph at the combat post) making a proposal. Purely for Russian use.

    1. Consider aircraft of the 5th generation not aircraft with dubious invisibility. And flyers with small missile defense. "Invisibility" should be considered a desirable option.
    2. Consider aircraft of the 6th generation not aircraft with dubious invisibility. And letaks with low missile defense + they must be unmanned + artificial intelligence, which allows you to choose the best solutions for the flight mode and combat.
    1. +2
      20 June 2022 16: 23
      If we discard all "persuasion", and look at the technical characteristics, then the MiG-35 is a really good car, the fifth generation. And cheap.

      So let the potential customer find out how "this is a really good car, the fifth generation. And cheap," if this is really the case, then there should be no end to foreign orders for the MiG-35 wink
      1. -5
        20 June 2022 16: 41
        It turns out a vicious circle: a potential customer looks at the fact that Russia has hammered a bolt into an excellent machine (something is "wrong" - it turns out - since they themselves do not buy). And having hammered a bolt on a beautiful machine, he argues that they do not buy it.

        But few of the foreign potential customers take a bath with respected Russian officials and generals...
        1. +1
          20 June 2022 20: 01
          It turns out a vicious circle: a potential customer looks at the fact that Russia has hammered a bolt into an excellent machine (something is "wrong" - it turns out - since they themselves do not buy). And having hammered a bolt on a beautiful machine, he argues that they do not buy it.

          The Chinese JF-17, which was not in service with the PLA Air Force, was successfully exported to Pakistan, Myanmar, Nigeria without any problems ...
          What prevents the MiG-35 from repeating this experience?
          1. 0
            20 June 2022 21: 52
            What prevents the MiG-35 from repeating this experience?


            Anti-advertising from Russia. And then - the priest had a dog ...
          2. -2
            21 June 2022 11: 49
            What prevents the MiG-35 from repeating this experience?

            Eggs interfere with a bad dancer)
    2. +2
      20 June 2022 17: 21
      There is a clear definition in the world which aircraft options put it in the 5th generation. Among them: afterburner transition to supersonic and work at this speed, weapons in the internal compartments, the size of the dot on the enemy locator, and so on. Which of these items does Mmg35 have?
  33. 0
    20 June 2022 13: 53
    The material is
    compilation of comprehension materials
    ...
    Once again, please, but slower - I write ...
  34. +3
    20 June 2022 14: 34
    But, alas, this is a fact: for twenty years nothing has been created at RAC MiG that could justify the very existence of the corporation.

    Do they finance their activities from their "own funds"?
    Or is it from the state budget?
    and now look (if you have such data) how much Denyuh the state gave them and for what during this period?
    and now pay attention to 275FZ, how should Denyushki go there and where
    and then draw conclusions according to the data received ...

    PYSY: if the Ministry of Defense of the Russian Federation does not allocate money, then there is nothing to conduct activities for ...
    so another article to prepare public opinion on the liquidation ...
    1. The comment was deleted.
      1. +1
        20 June 2022 17: 18
        Well, not really. Pogosyan was sitting there on top and he threw all the cash flows towards his native Su
        1. 0
          20 June 2022 17: 19
          That's right: money was given to both those and those: the planes were produced by both companies ...
    2. 0
      25 June 2022 18: 33
      So people come to work and do nothing? And what do they get paid for?
  35. +5
    20 June 2022 15: 16
    There is only a moment. Between the past and the future (from a song from the film festival Sannikov Land).
    31 - a deep modernization of the aircraft developed in the 60s.
    35 - not a very deep modernization of the aircraft developed in the 70s.
    Those. for 30-35 years - nothing new at all ...
  36. +3
    20 June 2022 16: 53
    The moment failed not with the moment-35, but with the moment-29 ...
    If we perceive the su-27 as the "answer" of the f-15, then it came out comparable and better ....
    But instant-29 is not the answer to f-16 ....
    So all these slogans, they say, the concept of "heavy / light" requires a light fighter ....
    Yes, it requires: only these are not MiG products for the last 50 years !!!
    I heard different opinions on this (twin-engine MIG-29): someone said, they say, "it was not possible to cut out a single-engine one", and some (in the ear) said, they say, they could not create then reliable engine (then modern operating conditions, essno) ....
    1. +1
      21 June 2022 00: 28
      Yes, it requires: only these are not MiG products for the last 50 years !!!


      In this case, the Su-57 - without product 30 - the same kind of thing - is so-so. And the Dagger is a development of the USSR. And what kind of tanks are we fighting? But what about Armata? Quite a bit of time has already passed - to do at least something there to roll out to shoot. Strategists? Submarines - Boreas - originally from the USSR. And it's been 40 years.
      Simply yes. What we have in stock - from a working one - comes from the USSR.
      Do you want Chess? OK. There will be another product 30, Armata, Husk, etc. Recently, a series of ships was rejected - the newest.

      For the MiG-35, look at the real numbers and characteristics. Leave your female FI for the boudoir or, in extreme cases, for the bath.
      1. 0
        21 June 2022 00: 48
        In this case, the Su-57 - without product 30 - the same kind of thing - is so-so. And the Dagger is a development of the USSR. And what kind of tanks are we fighting? But what about Armata? Quite a bit of time has already passed - to do at least something there to roll out to shoot. Strategists? Submarines - Boreas - originally from the USSR. And it's been 40 years.
        Simply yes. What we have in stock - from a working one - comes from the USSR.
        Do you want Chess? OK. There will be another product 30, Armata, Husk, etc. Recently, a series of ships was rejected - the newest.

        For the MiG-35, look at the real numbers and characteristics. Leave your female FI for the boudoir or, in extreme cases, for the bath.
        Your thoughts fled like cockroaches with the lights on....
        Try to put forward at least one articulate thesis ....

        Or explain: what kind of light single-engine fighter has been produced by the MiG Design Bureau over the past 50 years?
        1. 0
          21 June 2022 01: 25
          Ah, here it is, what's the matter))) And why does it have to be single-engine? For a small fighter, maneuverability is the first requirement. Two engines provide better maneuverability.

          Just do not talk about gluttony. We will not carry millions of passengers on these machines. And releasing thousands of them also - alas - will not work ...

          And do not tell tales that maneuverability is not relevant. Especially in light of the operation on the outskirts, where precisely maneuverability saves our aircraft from missiles.
          1. +1
            21 June 2022 01: 44
            And do not tell tales that maneuverability is not relevant. Especially in light of the operation on the outskirts, where it is maneuverability that saves our aircraft from missiles.

            The question is in order of clarification: from missiles - stingers?
            1. 0
              21 June 2022 10: 44
              The question is in order of clarification: from missiles - stingers?


              Is this not enough for you?

              But I think that even from more serious missiles in the tactics of conducting modern air combat - there is such an element - avoiding a missile. As it turns out, this is not an abstract situation, but more than a real plot.
              1. +1
                21 June 2022 11: 25
                The question is in order of clarification: from missiles - stingers?
                Is this not enough for you?

                Do you think that the key "skill" that will determine the mass and dimensions, that is, the appearance and purpose of the "transitional" to the 5th generation (MiG-35) or "pure" fifth generation (MiG-X) fighter should be "skill" at altitudes up to 5 kilometers, is it smart to dodge stingers?

                Did I understand you correctly?
                1. -2
                  21 June 2022 11: 38
                  I already commented on this. In all respects, with the exception of "invisibility", the MiG-35 is the 5th generation. But a small fighter - by definition and specificity, cannot be invisible (since it acts too close to the enemy), no matter how the developer wants it. As a result, they make an "invisible" aircraft with terrible flight characteristics (which is critical) and at the same time still "visible".

                  As for the 5th generation, I already commented that we need to change the "stuffing" of the concept itself. "Invisibility" - to translate into the rank of "desirable", because all the "invisibles" in fact are very noticeable and visible. But the distinguishing feature of the 5th generation should be the small missile defense of the aircraft.
                  1. +1
                    21 June 2022 11: 40
                    Again:
                    do you think that the key a "skill" that will determine the mass and dimensions, that is, the appearance and purpose of the "transitional" to the 5th generation (MiG-35) or "pure" fifth generation (MiG-X) fighter there must be the ability to deftly dodge stingers at altitudes up to 5 kilometers?

                    Did I understand you correctly?
                    Can you answer briefly - yes / no?
                    1. +1
                      21 June 2022 11: 46
                      Look at the wiki - there are a number of approximate characteristics corresponding to the 5th generation.

                      Since the pintos have a problem with aircraft maneuverability, they downplay this characteristic.

                      But practice shows that this is a key skill for an aircraft.

                      "ability" at altitudes up to 5 kilometers to deftly dodge stingers?


                      Yes, this is a mandatory feature for a 5th generation small aircraft. IMHO. And I don't give a shit what Americans think about it. So life and war count. If a 5th generation aircraft will be shot down by a Stinger or some other more expensive cheap crap, then this is not a 5th generation aircraft.

                      Did I understand you correctly? Can you answer briefly - yes / no?


                      ))) Mom, he wants to shoot me
                      1. 0
                        21 June 2022 12: 00
                        Thanks for the conversation...
                        Good luck!
                        hi
                      2. 0
                        20 July 2022 19: 17
                        Quote: Ivanushka Ivanov
                        If a 5th generation aircraft is shot down by a Stinger or some other more outrageous cheap crap

                        But didn’t you think that a 5th generation aircraft does not need to fly at the height of the MANPADS defeat?
                      3. 0
                        21 July 2022 09: 30
                        Because he is "invisible"?
    2. Eug
      +1
      21 June 2022 09: 43
      Well, yes, AL-21, R-11, R-13, R-25, ed. 47, ed. 55 (the two extreme ones - for MiG-23,27) - well, they were by no means reliable ...
      1. +1
        21 June 2022 11: 29
        Well, yes, AL-21, R-11, R-13, R-25, ed. 47, ed. 55 (the two extreme ones - for MiG-23,27) - well, they were by no means reliable ...

        So the "enemies" of the Klimovites from the Design Bureau of the cradle said about the RD-33 (for which they "bought") ...
    3. 0
      22 June 2022 22: 50
      MiG-29 is a legendary machine. For its time, it was a breakthrough and a sensation in the domestic and even global military aircraft industry. For the dry in terms of aerodynamic layout, it generally became the standard and the salvation of the T10 / Su-27 from death. Even now, he will overwhelm any imported and / or domestic competitor one on one in the BVB.
  37. +1
    20 June 2022 17: 09
    And who will make the MiG-41 long-range aviation complex?
  38. 0
    20 June 2022 17: 10
    In 2017, there were rumors about the development of SVVP for a moment.
  39. +4
    20 June 2022 17: 18
    In the progress of the development of the maximum heights of production of goods and quality, competition plays the main role, but the SU concern will not have it on the domestic market, this will play a very detrimental role for the Sukhoi concern in the future, this was well understood in the USSR. The country will lose the country's defense capability - this is criminal disastrous. MiG has always been a competitor to Su.
    1. The comment was deleted.
  40. +2
    20 June 2022 18: 13
    I do not understand the canonization of the MiG-31 almost into a superweapon with a dagger.
    Here is the principle, stuck together from what it was, hung a healthy 4-ton fool under the belly, and removed everything else, with which the flyers will defend themselves, with swear words and service pistols.
    Why don’t they develop missiles like X-15 or like the Yankees AGM-69 SRAM, and most importantly the carrier base itself, the same Su-34 can freely lift 5-6 missiles of the X-15 type of the new version and most importantly, the carrier is universal and serial.
  41. +2
    20 June 2022 18: 30
    Xian H-6, which is a copy of the Soviet Tu-16, cannot be a carrier of hypersonic weapons due to its speed

    What the author wanted to say: a riddle
    cruising track: ~ 850 km/h
    the maximum allowable number of M - no more than 0,9

    Does he, naively, think that the 9-A-7660 "Dagger" complex launches a gpz rocket at supersonic speed?
    1. 0
      24 June 2022 11: 55
      In fact, in many media it was said that the Dagger is launched at a speed of 2,5 thousand km / h.
      1. 0
        24 June 2022 13: 33
        Quote: Expert
        In fact, in many media it was said that the Dagger is launched at a speed of 2,5 thousand km / h.

        In many media, they actually claim that the earth is flat and on 3 whales, and renTV generally smokes heavily.
        I can imagine the feeling of the pilot and the surprise of the MiG-31, when a 2500 ton 4-S-9 separates from him at 7760 km / h.
        At supersonic launch and "light" rvv is not a trivial matter
        The video is not all supersonic, but there are a couple
  42. 0
    20 June 2022 20: 44
    Chinai India and Iran could save the RAC MIIg and Russia needs it.
  43. -2
    20 June 2022 20: 54
    How many MiG-31s ​​are stored in Perm? The glider is eternal, and everything else can be replaced
    1. 0
      21 June 2022 11: 56
      How to replace an engine that is not produced? Yes, and about the eternal glider, the statement is controversial, metal fatigue has not yet been canceled
    2. +1
      22 June 2022 01: 59
      The glider is eternal


      Who told you such nonsense?
      The airframe resource of the MiG-31BM is a maximum of 2500 flight hours.
      Now they are trying to expand it with modernization to 3500.
  44. +3
    20 June 2022 21: 07
    The author, to put it mildly, is not competent in everything, or deliberately provokes. In one thing, he is right, they came to power in their own way and there were only "effective managers" who made decisions on the creation of KLAs and Rostecs and the "optimization and modernization" of design bureaus and the industry as a whole, which ultimately led to degradation and practical destruction , at least the civil aviation industry. Now 'running on the ceiling', trying to resuscitate. Not China should save the MiG, but Russia should save it! We are waiting for the era of UAVs for various tactical purposes. In the aspect of the sixth and subsequent generations, on which, by the way, America has been working with might and main for a long time, MiG must urgently take up this work. We are talking about the defense capability and military-technical superiority of the country, and the MiG has goals and objectives here that it must achieve and solve!
  45. +3
    20 June 2022 21: 17
    This is not the failure of the MIG, this is the failure of this moronic state and its policy of higher education
  46. 0
    21 June 2022 09: 08
    I did not quite catch the connection between the MIG-31 order and the rescue of the MIG-a, as a design bureau.
    The production of these aircraft is not established either at Sukhoi or at MiG.
    A merger will result in an organizational reshuffling. All documentation will be sent.

    It makes no difference in this case whether they will be produced at Mig or Sukhoi.
  47. Eug
    0
    21 June 2022 09: 37
    How interesting ... MiG-35 - with a great future? And what should be done for this? And who should provide this future (give money for it)? And why hasn't this been done yet? And where is the single-engine MiG of the 5th generation at least in the layout? Only in pictures?
  48. +1
    21 June 2022 10: 58
    Sell ​​your license to IRAN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! And the money will be both work and experience for our employees. Well, do we really have such mediocrity at the helm collected ??????!!!!! or the whole organized crime group, he still thinks that the war will end in a couple of months and they will again travel around Monaco and Nice ...... And the Mikoyan design bureau with 1 aircraft plant needs to be removed from the dry and left independent, and is there really no 1 for the whole raisa !! !! aircraft designer and 1 !!!!! administrator, but never believe !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  49. +3
    21 June 2022 14: 56
    Sorry, but I haven’t seen a dumber article ... The state, represented by its officials, has ruined a state-owned company, and the whole strategy of saving one of the once leading companies - suddenly a magician will fly in a blue helicopter with slanting eyes and a suitcase of money)) Ridiculous. RSK "MiG" did not create anything? and for what, forgive me, he had to create? Was he given as much money for projects as Sukhoi? Or did the employees have to be unfastened from the salary? Ilyushin's design bureau has already been ruined as a design school - they could not create a flying small tonnage without critical jambs. Let's go there Mig. And combine everything with the USC. Unarmed boats and flightless airplanes will be riveted to the United Russian Imperfections corporation.
  50. +2
    21 June 2022 14: 56
    REMOVE ALREADY
    Su-30SM "Russian Knights" from the title photo! Blood from the eyes!!!
  51. 0
    21 June 2022 17: 54
    Quote: svp67
    Quote: clou
    f-18 is also twin-engine

    And the F-35B and F-35C?

    Pay for versatility and the Yankees have great faith in their engine.
    1. 0
      28 August 2022 17: 50
      The F 18 was built for the navy. The F 15 is too heavy for aircraft carriers, and flying a single-engine aircraft over the sea is risky.
  52. 0
    21 June 2022 23: 26
    But the question arises: why did the Russian Aerospace Forces refuse to buy the aircraft? Do they not understand their happiness or do they understand too well?


    I have a suspicion that no one asks them at all... :)
    By analogy with the Navy - there the “manufacturer” - USC - decides what the fleet needs...
    That's what the experts say... :)
  53. -2
    22 June 2022 01: 50
    And there is an opinion that the MiG-31 is what is needed, because in the modern aviation market there is simply no other alternative.


    MIG-31 is an old and useless pepelats. No one in their right mind would make them again.
    But there is no alternative to it due to lack of demand.
  54. AML
    +3
    22 June 2022 11: 20
    Quote from Mitia68
    And there is an opinion that the MiG-31 is what is needed, because in the modern aviation market there is simply no other alternative.


    MIG-31 is an old and useless pepelats. No one in their right mind would make them again.
    But there is no alternative to it due to lack of demand.


    Old and unclaimed is the f-22. Because it seems like he is, but he doesn’t seem to be. And the MIG-31, first of all, is an air defense system and here there really is no alternative to it.

    The Russian Federation has enough territories and for every 100 km with 300/400 the navel will untie
  55. 0
    22 June 2022 22: 57
    Quote: Negruz
    Sukhoi had already begun to take bread from RAC MiG when he took up the Su-75 light single-engine fighter.
    Sukhoi cannot take away bread from the instant, firstly, because the instant has not done anything for a long time, and, secondly, the instant has not made single-engine aircraft for a very long time ....
    The concept of the Su-35 / Mig-35 "heavy / light fighter" did not grow together precisely because the Mig-35 is not a damn light ....
    hi

    What kind of fighter do you think today, domestic or imported, can be considered light?
  56. The comment was deleted.
  57. 0
    24 June 2022 15: 23
    Quote: Negruz
    In any case, being left without a manufacturer of light fighters is a crime.

    A light fighter cannot be twin-engine ....
    They "save" on the engine, tanks, fuselage ...

    Tell me, which domestic or imported fighters do you think are light today? Name them please.
  58. 0
    24 June 2022 16: 07
    Quote from Mitia68
    And there is an opinion that the MiG-31 is what is needed, because in the modern aviation market there is simply no other alternative.


    MIG-31 is an old and useless pepelats. No one in their right mind would make them again.
    But there is no alternative to it due to lack of demand.

    Does anyone in the world today have an aircraft with capabilities and characteristics similar to the MiG-31?
  59. 0
    24 June 2022 16: 24
    Quote: Negruz
    In this case, the Su-57 - without product 30 - the same kind of thing - is so-so. And the Dagger is a development of the USSR. And what kind of tanks are we fighting? But what about Armata? Quite a bit of time has already passed - to do at least something there to roll out to shoot. Strategists? Submarines - Boreas - originally from the USSR. And it's been 40 years.
    Simply yes. What we have in stock - from a working one - comes from the USSR.
    Do you want Chess? OK. There will be another product 30, Armata, Husk, etc. Recently, a series of ships was rejected - the newest.

    For the MiG-35, look at the real numbers and characteristics. Leave your female FI for the boudoir or, in extreme cases, for the bath.
    Your thoughts fled like cockroaches with the lights on....
    Try to put forward at least one articulate thesis ....

    Or explain: what kind of light single-engine fighter has been produced by the MiG Design Bureau over the past 50 years?

    Should he have done this? Should we release a light single-engine one? Please tell me today the fighters that you consider light, and why do you consider them such?
  60. 0
    24 June 2022 16: 54
    Quote: Negruz
    The moment failed not with the moment-35, but with the moment-29 ...
    If we perceive the su-27 as the "answer" of the f-15, then it came out comparable and better ....
    But instant-29 is not the answer to f-16 ....
    So all these slogans, they say, the concept of "heavy / light" requires a light fighter ....
    Yes, it requires: only these are not MiG products for the last 50 years !!!
    I heard different opinions on this (twin-engine MIG-29): someone said, they say, "it was not possible to cut out a single-engine one", and some (in the ear) said, they say, they could not create then reliable engine (then modern operating conditions, essno) ....


    The MiG-29 is a legendary machine. For its time, it was a breakthrough and a sensation in the domestic and even global military aircraft industry. For the dry aerodynamic design, it generally became the standard and saved the T10/su-27 from death. Even now, one-on-one at BVB, he will defeat any imported and/or domestic competitor
  61. 0
    24 June 2022 17: 35
    Quote: Genry
    Quote: ramzay21
    The MiG-35 is needed by our Aerospace Forces to replace the MiG-29, and to remain only with heavy fighters is a betrayal.

    The experience of Syria has shown that in the conditions of sparsely located air bases, the MiG29 / 35 has an insufficient radius and the number of weapons. In Ukraine, the range of airfields from the front line should be more than 100 km (300 km). This drastically reduces the time spent in the duty / combat zone of the MiGs.
    And yes, the appearance of the modern Su-75, unified with the Su-57 (common materials, parts, equipment and weapons), completely puts an end to the MiG-35.

    Each theater of military operations has its own specifics. The MiG has a good radius and the load is also okay. You need to somehow better justify their insufficiency, as you say, otherwise any fighter you have will turn into a strategic bomber. Regarding the “appearance” of the Su-75, this is said too loudly. Until the real appearance, as in the song, go and go, fly and fly. So far we are not even observing a project, but a project. And in general, the proposal of a dry “commercial” fighter does not mean at all that this is the right and necessary direction on which time and government resources now need to be spent. Let them do whatever they want at their own expense, but not at the expense of the country. In terms of national security, we need to think not in commercial terms, but primarily in military-technical superiority and combat effectiveness. Therefore, there is no need to rush to give up on the MiG-35 and the company as a whole. We need to preserve it and set appropriate, correct goals and objectives for it.
  62. 0
    24 June 2022 18: 08
    Quote from Whitefall
    It's all your pests' fault, oga. And not the fact that for the RSFSR the MiGs had too short a range, but most of the MiGs went to Ukraine. Well, you just need to understand that to produce a zoo of aircraft, when the basis is SS 27, SS 30, SS 35, is at least stupid. And to rivet a fighter that would be just like that is stupid. Now, if it were compatible in terms of components and spare parts with dryers, then yes, And so the Mig is superfluous in the current situation. And our lightest one will most likely be the SU 75, because it promises to be compatible in many parts with the SU 35 and su57


    Regarding the zoo. The zoo is right next to the dry one. You yourself indicated it, by the way, you forgot the Su-33. It was just dry and developed with government funding, but in essence it is just a modification of the Su-27. And if you’re going to clean the zoo, then this is exactly what it means to be dry. Therefore, we need to take an even closer look at who is the odd one out here.
  63. 0
    24 June 2022 18: 36
    Quote: spektr9
    AFAR Zhuk is the manufacturer of Fazatron, but its zaputinites had already been bombed, the building was demolished in 2020, the employees fled, they had a large plot in a good place in Moscow and a world name that our authorities don’t care about.

    Judging by the number of AFARs on our aircraft (at least on the SU, at least on the MiG), this was a single development created not on a domestic basis, which could not be put into production. For Zaputintsy and other liberals are not only Phasatron, but our entire electronics industry for 30 years. So, as if AFAR on our fighters is not a pipe dream

    The MiG went down in history after Pogosyan pulled all the funding over to himself and at the same time the smart employees from the MiG in the early 2000s, he was in great favor with the GDP, and now we will be left without light fighters, other such only with heavy fighters in the world no.

    Even before the beginning of the 29s, Mig did not have a light fighter (Mig 30 does not belong to this in any way) and XNUMX years after the collapse, the MiG design bureau did not come close to its creation, and now there is simply no point in continuing the existence of this design bureau


    Name the domestic or imported fighters that you consider light. This is first of all. Secondly, MiG did not have the maximum financial benefits regime that was provided to Sukhoi. And during this time, Sukhoi also did not create anything special, except for a zoo based on the Su-27 and the Su-57, which was born in agony. It is not MiG’s fault for the lack of any breakthrough solutions and projects over the years; it is the fault of the state, which should have set appropriate goals and objectives for the company in the mode of proper financing. But this was not done. But our oligarchy and bureaucracy have trillions in offshores and a multi-hundred-million-dollar yacht fleet that is larger in number than cruisers and fifth-generation aircraft.
  64. +1
    24 June 2022 21: 39
    Quote: Negruz
    The difference in weight and payload....
    Here is a comparison of four aircraft: mirage-2000 (1 engine), mig-29 (2 engines), j-10 (1 engine), rafal (2 engines); the first digit is the empty weight, the second is the maximum takeoff weight (in tons):
    7,5/17
    11/18,5
    9/20
    10/24,5

    What caught your eye?


    Excellent performance TWO-engine Rafal. And you?
    1. 0
      26 June 2022 20: 24
      Regarding Raphael, this is for the Indians. Eh...they ate shit. Are we discussing the transporter now? But you were lying - 24,5t - this also applies to Migu. Why the hell did you roll out the 29th? For payload, see below. But the Mig-35 is faster, higher - decently. Rafael's payload weight is 9,5 tons. Mig has only suspended equipment - 7t. And the pilot(s)’s shit + diaper, two? In terms of combat radius, the Mig-35 is inferior to 1000 - versus 1390. But there, as always, the French are cunning, because the usual radius with the Mig's PTB = 3500/2 = 1750. Rafael has 1800. It turns out that they provide a lightweight version of the radius with a combat load, which will be approximately the same as the Mig.

      Here someone blamed Mig for his old age. So, Raphael's first flight was in 1986. The Mig-35 has a 2016 year.

      Total: if you do not take into account fuel consumption, as a small fighter the Mig-35 is usually superior to the Rafael in all combat (especially maneuverability) and technical characteristics. It’s better to remain silent about the cost of the car. As well as about missile weapons.
      1. 0
        26 June 2022 20: 38
        We need a light, cheap, but good fighter for fighting for the next 10 years. We need one that is already ready and tested, right now. How will we fight with the nimble and numerous small things of NATO on occasion?
  65. The comment was deleted.
  66. 0
    21 July 2022 16: 10
    Does the author seriously think that the Su-30M is more different from the Su-27 than the MiG-35 is from the MiG-29? Or that even the Su-35 is more different from the Su-27? Yes, the engines are different. But the radar is not AFAR. The aerodynamics of the Su-27 and MiG-29 are based on the same ideas. Moreover, initially the MiG did not require EMDS to achieve superiority in maneuverability. I very much doubt that the original fuselage manufacturing technologies of the MiG and Su were radically, “for generations,” different. The technological level of the industry was approximately the same.
    The problems for RSK MiG began after the Indians did not miss the opportunity to get a product that the Americans were not throwing around left and right. Those. The Su-30 has no competitors at all. Eagle is only available to a select few.
    India was forced to buy the MiG-29K along with the ex-Gorshkov. Other manufacturers of “conventional” fighters are only now mastering ski-jump launch. And another question is, to what extent will they be able to take off with a combat load from Indian aircraft carriers? Tejas took off... almost empty.
    There were many problems with the ship's MiG. Its fuselage is technologically noticeably different from the original one; there are more composites now. By that time, plant No. 1 was closed, production was moved to Lukhovitsy. Naturally, Muscovites did not go there to work. There was never a final assembly in Lukhovitsy.
    RD-33 is usually criticized. In fact, problems with smoke arose only from savings; they were solved initially and have been solved now. Yes, perhaps it is made “simpler” than the AL-31, as it should be for a more mass-produced vehicle suitable for mass production, including in wartime. Klimov continued to improve the engine, the question is to bring it to fruition in mass production. But, as Chemezov and Rogozin said, there should be no factories in Moscow. And MMP im. V.V. Chernysheva is located in Moscow. Many people know that the land under the plant has already been sold. Chernyshev should “move” to Salyut. There are no comments about this, see above about Lukhovitsy. By the way, Kronstadt in Moscow is located on the same plot of land.
    VKS do not buy MiG-35? Actually, we were going to:
    https://ria.ru/20170127/1486653405.html?ysclid=l5v1kbwfpu419397593
    But Bondarev was sent to the Senate. The reasons are different. The Indians eventually got enough of the Su-30. They no longer want to contact us for another 130 aircraft, they are tired of us. Now the Irkutsk plant is idle. The army gets what the foreigners buy. customer. Borisov said this almost directly when he was first appointed.
    As a result, we received a unique air force - in which not only are heavy fighters predominant, but almost half of them are two-seaters. Even the USA doesn’t live so luxuriously. All over the world, light fighters are the most common. The situation with the MiG-35 is primarily a consequence of the reluctance of the UAC to seriously engage in this machine, because this would threaten its mass production at a site that is still not very ready for this.
    Now the Su-34 and Su-30 are working hard. Just read an article on Topwar that many of them will need repairs soon. It seems that we are not capable of producing more than 12-15 such aircraft per year. What will we replace them with? The Su-57 is definitely not suitable for this; its serial production is even worse. Checkmate is still an advertising brochure.
  67. 0
    24 July 2022 04: 52
    China won't bail out MiG unless they have a particularly attractive product. Only if their product is competitive and China buys it, then it is advertising and even the Chinese buy it, then the product will sell well all over the world.
  68. 0
    3 August 2022 15: 25
    All this is like fortune telling on coffee grounds. I think that merging two design bureaus is the most effective solution to concentrate scarce resources. And with the concept of a future war, probably not everything is clear, which is why there are no clear formulations about what kind of aviation we need and what kind we can have. But what is already absolutely clear is that it is necessary to have aircraft capable of operating in near space, because the primary targets in a major war will be satellite constellations and striking with their help against the enemy’s most important targets.
  69. 0
    5 August 2022 13: 57
    What a mess is going on, there is no consistency, planning, strategic decisions, just chatter, irresponsibility, mediocre stupidity. Aviation knowledge and developments will be lost. industrial potential. There is no STATE, a rotten, rotten swamp!
  70. DO
    0
    12 August 2022 14: 11
    Without a miracle in the form of orders for RSK MiG, the issue of liquidation is not a matter of very long time

    Breaking is not building. We have already seen enough of “closures” over the past decades.
    It seems that given the current situation with the MiG design bureau, it would be advisable for the government to consider reviving the design bureau for the development of military aircraft with the MiG brand, as a state startup. Because it is quite obvious that this design bureau will no longer rise on its own.
    Well, it’s clear to a hedgehog that specialists of the required level will not come to the design bureau for a penny salary.
    If until now China has not been able to create anything worthwhile in terms of strategic missile carriers (no matter what size), then it would be worth trying to solve the problem precisely at the expense of the MiG-31K, which are quite suitable for this role.

    Maybe the solution to the problems of building Chinese hypersonic missile carriers should be left to China itself? Should the MiG Design Bureau consider the tasks that are relevant for the Russian Armed Forces today?
    For example, given that the Su-25 attack aircraft are most in demand for air defense missions, and they suffer the greatest losses, should we consider creating an unmanned single-engine attack aircraft?
  71. 0
    28 August 2022 17: 49
    It seems that work is underway to use the Su 34 Daggers to launch
  72. 0
    30 August 2022 20: 27
    What remains to be written is how Sukhoi took control of MIG and long and diligently destroyed his competitor from the inside. He lured away specialists and knocked them out of tenders. Klimov is not doing well with the VK-2500, but do you want an engine to replace the RD-33M3? By the way, it is still possible to modernize it quite simply. Make the hot part from new materials (similar to AL-41F1), add contours, install a plasma ignition system, upgrade the fuel system and digital control, etc. those. make it more modern and then it would still work. We need to understand the situation - we need more aircraft for less money. The light twin-engine was not needed by Russian Aviation, but everyone praises the new single-engine. It's a mess. But for the MIG-31 everything is simple. The Americans in Iraq shot down 2 MIG-25s, firing 10-15 missiles at them each time, and destroyed the rest on the ground. They themselves did not expect such agility from old junk... Upgrade the MIG-31 using modern materials and technologies. Nobody wants to bother with this
  73. -1
    6 September 2022 17: 05
    I propose merging RSK “MiG” and OKB Mil and calling it “MiMiGl”.
    The coolest name will come from the merger of the Sukhoi Design Bureau and the Kamov Design Bureau...