MiG-35: the last page has not been turned?
Indeed, something strange is happening: you'd think the Su-75 would be there, you could slander, predict, and analyze as much as you like, but no. That same MiG-35 is haunting the other side.
We, admittedly, have practically written him off here. And there's reason to be. But the fact that something keeps popping up on the other side, and open-ended discussions—that's what's surprising.
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Sure, if there's a smoke generator nearby. The only question is who's blowing the smoke and why. When a partner criticizes our aircraft, it's understandable: they want a discount. When an opponent criticizes us, it's also understandable: they want to sell their aircraft. But when it's neither here nor there—that's where things get weird. And when it's not the Su-75, which can be both criticized and praised, but the MiG-35, with which "everything is complicated."
In fact, there is nothing complicated, the production of the aircraft has ceased, the prototypes are gathering dust somewhere, and six production aircraft are in service Defense Moscow. They say they're chasing us. drones, and at the same time, it's convenient to show to those who are interested. Surely we shouldn't send Kim Jong-un to Khalino, where the 35th used to be based?
But the plane is interesting...
For those who may not be aware, the MiG-35 is based on, and therefore shares as much commonality as possible with, the MiG-29K. Typically, it's the other way around, with a land-based aircraft being used to develop a naval variant, but here we have it: the airframe, the entire powerplant, the aircraft's systems, and the cockpit (yes, in our case, a two-seater version is possible, which appeals to customers in the East) are virtually identical.
Of course, the MiG-35 lacks a landing hook, replacing it with a drag chute, the landing gear is simpler, and the wings don't fold. Consequently, the aircraft became lighter, which seriously prompted consideration of a two-seater version. However, the anti-corrosion treatment was carried out to marine standards. aviation: firstly, it is more reliable, secondly – again, it is a standardization of production.
But the internal components were quite different. The difference between 1988 and 2002 is quite significant in this regard. An active phased array radar, a new-generation onboard defense system based on a rather loose combination of electronic, optical, and passive defense systems, and a container with navigation and target acquisition equipment were added to the equipment list.
Some work was done on the then-fashionable stealth feature, meaning the MiG-35 had reduced thermal and radar signatures, but, of course, it never claimed to be a fifth-generation aircraft, despite what the West might write. However, "well-tailored and tightly stitched," it could take off and land not only from unequipped and unlit airfields, but from virtually any more or less suitable airfield.
Plus, the MiG-35's autonomy and reliability, which its predecessor had achieved at a world-class level, were elevated to a pedestal. Everything that could be duplicated (and even what couldn't) was. Some systems went even further than the MiG-29K. For example, the 35K's two generators were replaced with four. A "power unit mode" was implemented, where the starters activate the accessory gearboxes when the engines are off. This means, without turning on the engines or connecting external power sources, the batteries can fully spin up the accessory gearboxes (responsible for generating the aircraft's electrical and hydraulic power) and test all systems on the ground. Finally, the MiG-35 was equipped with an onboard oxygen-producing system.
Overall, it may not be a “4+++”, but it’s a very solid “4++”.
The MiG-35 doesn't have the characteristics of a fifth-generation stealth fighter, and it has no international partners. However, no one has ever hidden this. Another rather unpleasant aspect of the MiG-35 is its, to put it mildly, limited combat record. But it would be surprising to expect a decent victory record from an aircraft produced in such a small series.
What they write on the other side:
"The MiG-35 was used against the Ukrainians only in small numbers. The MiG-35 had no significant impact on the situation. The most it did was suppress the enemy's air defense system. It was also used for precision strikes against ground targets in Ukraine.
But this was a routine mission that did not play a decisive role in the war. The MiG-31 often flew beyond the range of enemy fighters and remained in Russian airspace.
Russia initially ordered 37 MiG-35s, but fewer than ten entered service. The production plan was cut to 24 fighters. This was a disappointment, as Russia faced international sanctions, which made it difficult to obtain spare parts and components for the MiG-35.
Potential clients in the export market, realizing that the program has failed, are not yet ready to sit down at the negotiating table with the Russians."
But this was a routine mission that did not play a decisive role in the war. The MiG-31 often flew beyond the range of enemy fighters and remained in Russian airspace.
Russia initially ordered 37 MiG-35s, but fewer than ten entered service. The production plan was cut to 24 fighters. This was a disappointment, as Russia faced international sanctions, which made it difficult to obtain spare parts and components for the MiG-35.
Potential clients in the export market, realizing that the program has failed, are not yet ready to sit down at the negotiating table with the Russians."
Overall, there's more than enough nonsense written, but this is precisely where it's time to ask: if everything is so bad, if the aircraft is worthless, why are we talking about the MiG-35 and not the Su-75? Okay, the shortcomings are described in great detail, and some of them are valid, while others are worth a good laugh, while also racking your brain trying to figure out what kind of things the US and Europe are buying for MiGs. You can take a risk, but you can also lose in the first round, because not everyone's brain is gifted with such imagination.
Can this aircraft be sold? Definitely. Moreover, the MiG-35 has a specific market among those countries that have operated the MiG-29 in all its guises. Eritrea, Sudan, Myanmar, Bangladesh, North Korea, Peru, Mongolia, Sudan, Yemen, Malaysia—the list of countries that have operated the MiG-29 is quite long, and not all countries are living on credit. Potential buyers exist. And they need the aircraft.
And let them not be as expensive as the F-15 and F-16, not as soft-advanced and therefore insanely expensive as the F-35 and more reliable than the F/A-18, which have recently gone crazy in terms of accidents.
And the MiG is quite appropriate here. Yes, it's a fighter-bomber for third-world countries, but... dollars don't stink.
The latest hoax was perpetrated by journalists from EurAsian Times. It's hard to say why hot-blooded Indian guys would want to do this, but 1945 and P&H happily picked up the thread and even expanded on it.
"This all-weather aircraft, capable of operating both day and night, can perform air superiority missions and engage moving and stationary ground and sea targets. The designers cite the NPK-SPP OLS-k electro-optical target designation and surveillance system, mounted on the fuselage, as suitable for these purposes. It is also equipped with a digital fly-by-wire control system and a modern ammunition complement."
The MiG-35 truly has a powerful arsenal. Nine hardpoints carry a variety of weapons, including anti-ship weapons. missiles Kh-31A, Kh-31P anti-radar missiles, Kh-29TE missiles, and KAB-500K bombs. There's plenty to go around, as they say.
The MiG-35 was also called the “Fourth Generation Bridge to Nowhere.”
It's said that it didn't live up to expectations. The MiG-35 was expected to outperform American fighters like the F-16 Viper. There was also talk that the MiG-35 could become an equally worthy competitor with stealth, as was the case with the Su-35. But the required level of stealth was not achieved, and the MiG became an "interim solution"—better than basic fourth-generation fighters, but less valuable than fifth-generation fighters.
Overall, the MiG-35 continues to underwhelm potential buyers. Egyptian troublemakers once considered purchasing this aircraft, but perhaps noticing its lack of a clear role in the Russian Air Force's combat complement, Egypt opted to purchase the MiG-29M. This is a significant indicator. This is likely why Argentina, Bangladesh, and Malaysia are also still in a dormant state, and US sanctions for purchasing Russian aircraft are a thorn in the side. However, Algeria continues to buy them.
India (where the wave of publications originated) also took a long time to look, but in the end created its own personal mess in terms of aviation, especially naval aviation.
But the argument was precisely this: if the Russians don't plan to use the MiG-35, why buy it? And the whole world sees that the Su-30 and Su-35 are toiling away in the Air Defense Forces.
And, by the way, this world can clearly observe the “successes” of Ukrainian aviation, which consists of Su-27 and MiG-29.
The Russian Aerospace Forces' apparent one-sidedness, having effectively switched to the Su-25, is noticeable, but who said having different types of aircraft is necessary? Many countries make do with just one type and are perfectly fine, believing their airspace security is in order.
There's been talk that MiG-35 production may resume. They've even given a timeframe: 2027. It's actually quite realistic. The number of aircraft and customers aren't being announced, but... there have been demonstrations, and those who can afford them have seen the MiG-35. And they haven't seen it at an exhibition or air show, but at the airfield from which the aircraft fly combat missions. There is a difference.
This sparked discussions and speculation about who stands to gain and who stands to lose from the MiG-35 acquisition. And this is certainly not without reason, as both strengths and weaknesses are being discussed.
Speaking of weaknesses.
In reality, there aren't that many. The first thing they mention is "low fuel efficiency." Yes, the MiG has always been inferior to the Sukhoi in range, that's true. But it's been said many times that engines can be installed even with UHT, no problem. Anything goes, as they say, and Russian engines with UHT—sorry, even the US ones aren't yet up to... technical standards.
Smoke... Yes, that's true. The RD-33 was a masterpiece in this regard, because it smoked at both maximum and minimum speeds.
But over time, the engine was improved, and it's now safe to say that the RD-33MK engine's smoke trail is minimal. Its service life was also increased to 4,000 hours, a point detractors had always tipped against the RD-33's nozzle.
There were complaints about the radar and radar systems, but that's just ridiculous: it's clear the Indians started it all. But what they did during their long-running tender, let them be held accountable. Did they want to buy the Rafale? Did they do everything to achieve that? Now let them reward their pilots (sadly, posthumously) for flying these misunderstandings.
Yes, they wrote a lot back then about how flawed the radar was and how unstable the optical location system was, but none of that should be taken seriously. It was a fight against a competitor, nothing more. The whole world knows that the Indians usually play dirty to gain real profit.
It's strange that the "trick" of operating outside the airfield network didn't work out. You'd think Mali and other places where a compacted strip of sand is the definition of an airfield would have seized on this feature, but no. Incidentally, the Swedes didn't have much success with the JAS 39 Gripen either; there was no queue for the aircraft.
And finally, perhaps, there really is a conceptual flaw in the way the aircraft is presented to potential buyers. It's a major oversight, but many on the other side point out that the aircraft doesn't have a clear role in Russia's air superiority doctrine and its very limited operational status. In short, these are marketing missteps.
The Su-57 is certainly trending these days. After its unveiling at the Dubai Airshow, everyone became interested in the aircraft, and while not everyone can afford the luxury of buying a Russian one, weapons, but those who can, will buy.
The upcoming arrival of the Su-75 certainly complicates matters, but the aircraft aren't entirely similar. The Su-75 will definitely play in the light fighter class, while the MiG-35 is a general-purpose fighter, heavier, and twin-engine. But there's a significant caveat: for those who have previously used MiGs, the Su-75 or 57 will be very expensive. After all, it's not just the aircraft itself; it'll also require the acquisition of all the associated maintenance infrastructure, and all of this equipment is different for the Su-75 and MiG.
We're not talking about buyers like Algeria, but rather lower-ranking countries. And in this case, with some marketing tweaks, it might work.
The MiG-35 has potential, both for export and combat. It's worth remembering that after the collapse of the USSR, amidst the warming climate, numerous training exercises were conducted between the West German and East German air forces, and East German MiG-29s convincingly defeated both American F-15s and F-16s, and French Mirage 2000s. Did that happen? It did.
Moreover, the MiG-35 has an undeniable advantage: it can be easily and effortlessly converted into a two-seater, and this was factored into the design. The only difference from the single-seater is that the fuel capacity in the internal tanks is reduced by 360 liters due to the addition of a second pilot. In terms of design, the aircraft are completely identical, right down to the canopy frame.
In general, standardization is a very beneficial undertaking. And if we add to this the fact that RSC MiG is a leader in the development and production of training simulators…
Overall, there's potential. It's not yet clear who the buyer will be after 2027. Apparently, the regime is so tightly guarded that even Western snoops haven't been able to find out anything, but the fact that the Indians are the ones causing the stir suggests it's highly likely they will.
Why? Well, firstly, the MiG-35 was involved in that tender, and India knows what kind of aircraft it is. Secondly, they're planning to solve the aircraft problem, because the Rafale is still a Rafale. Thirdly, India is a MiG operator.
And finally: the Indians' vacillations and hesitations have long been well-known. Today they want nothing but the Rafale, tomorrow they'll order another Su-30MKI, next up they'll have the Su-57 (naturally, to be manufactured in India), and so on. They'll certainly also be toying with the idea of the Su-75, so why not return to the MiG-35?
In short, everything is according to Indian canons. The dancing is just beginning, those who ordered the Rafales have already begun serving their prison sentences, so the carnival can begin anew. Especially since it will be run not by those who profited from the Rafales, but by those who cried foul.
But in this scenario, the MiG-35 has a chance for the future. Moreover, it's perfectly clear that if India buys it, others will follow. Moreover, New Delhi is already seriously considering the idea of peddling Russian aircraft assembled in India.
So 2027 is not that far away, there will be something to see.
Information