MiG-35: flies into history as unnecessary

9 2022 June 380

In fact, two years ago, I already wondered whether our Aerospace Forces / Air Force needed the MiG-35. We can say that the answer is received: it is not needed. At all. And six copies of the aircraft that were released will simply go to the dump after some time. stories. Therefore, this material will become a kind of obituary for this very promising machine, in fact, the crowning achievement of RAC MiG JSC.

In general, the number of the car itself was unlucky. There were so many projects with such a name that when you look at the list, you understand: it’s not good.

The name MiG-35 was once worn by:
- project of the fifth generation multifunctional fighter MiG 1.44;
- prototypes of the MiG-29M and MiG-29K with the Zhuk-A radar;
- a fighter project for the Indian competition MMRCA;
- a project for the development of MiG-29K/KUB aircraft for the Navy;
- a development project for the MiG-29M2, which became the MiG-35 in the single-seat version, and the MiG-35D in the double-seat version.

To say that the MiG-35 is a modification of the MiG-29, a knowledgeable person will not turn his tongue. Yes, this is a development of the model, but it is so radical that in reality it is a different aircraft. Although the MiG-35 took the most useful from its predecessor: low cost of operation, unpretentiousness and the ability to land on unpaved strips.

There are many more differences from the MiG-29:
- fuselage, single for single and double modifications;
- a new wing of a larger area and with more advanced mechanization;
- a large area of stabilizers;
- Radar "Zhuk-A" with an active phased antenna array in the configuration for the Indian Air Force, for the Russian Aerospace Forces a cheaper version of the Zhuk-M radar with a conventional SCAR or (not confirmed, planned with Zhuk-AM)
- a defense complex with electronic warfare equipment, detectors of attacking missiles and laser irradiation, decoy launchers;
- open architecture avionics;
- optical-location station and helmet-mounted target designation and aiming system;
- reduced radar visibility;
- new electronic engine control system RD-33MK;
- three-channel electric remote control system;
- increased fuel supply, the possibility of refueling in the air;
- the possibility of using the MiG-35 as a tanker in the air.

And this is not all that the MiG-35 was “rich in”. But alas, the plane did not "fall into the yard." And the reason for this was not some shortcomings of the MiG-35, the elementary corporate battles under the carpets and on the bath fields were to blame.

In the battle between Mikoyan and Gurevich and Sukhoi, the Sukhoi firm won. In general, of course, it is good that Sukhoi Company is doing very well. Fighters, bombers, passenger liners... AO MiG has virtually no place left on the market.

Today, Su fighters and bombers make up the bulk of the Russian Aerospace Forces. The question is how good it is. Will heavy Su fighters be able to solve all the tasks that modern air combat will pose?

In general, Su and MiG were compared very often. Specifically, the Su-35 and MiG-35 were dismantled "by the bones."

The MiG-35 is capable of fighting on equal terms with all existing vehicles of a potential enemy. Yes, "4++" is almost "5", but almost. However, the MiG-35 has an undeniable advantage: light weight and excellent maneuverability.

Weight 27,5 tons. Speed 2600 km/h, flight range with load - 3 km. Combat radius - 000 km. The rate of climb is one of the best in the world - 1000 m/s. Radars are able to see a target at a distance of 330-200 km. Combat load - 250 tons. 7 mm gun GSh-30-30, 1 hardpoints for rockets, bombs, mines.

The Su-35 differs precisely in how a heavy fighter should differ from a light one. Weight 34,5 tons. The speed is the same 2500 km / h as the MiG-35. Flight range - 3 km. Combat radius - 500 km. Rate of climb 1 m/s. Radars detect a target from a distance of 800 km. Combat load 280 tons. Gun GSh-400-8, made the same missiles as the MiG-30. Electronic warfare equipment, the Irbis radar is an order of magnitude more powerful, plus an optical-location station.

In principle, almost identical aircraft capable of solving the same tasks. Gain air superiority, strike at ground and surface targets. The combat load of the "thirty-fifths" is almost the same, respectively, the tasks that aircraft can solve with its help, too.

The Su-35 "sees" further than the MiG, but the MiG is significantly cheaper. In the case of combat use, light fighters of the MiG-35 type are more profitable. They do not cause such financial damage in case of loss, their failure is easier and faster to compensate. And if both fighters, light and heavy, can cope with the task with the same efficiency, then it is better to take the light and cheap MiG into the sky than the expensive Su.

It has been said more than once that the MiG is an air war worker. By the way, the conflict in Ukraine showed this. The light fighter is the best vehicle for fighting at close range and at high speeds. The MiG-35 is slightly smaller than the Su-35, carries slightly less weapons, but thanks to this it is slightly faster and more maneuverable.

Yes, in terms of radio electronics, target detection, the MiG is inferior to the Su. But for this "Su" pays much more takeoff weight.

The aircraft are similar in functionality, although they belong to different classes. A light fighter can be used where it would be simply unprofitable to use a heavy one: to shoot down a reconnaissance drone at high altitude, it is not necessary to use an expensive air defense missile for this. And why raise something that is more expensive to maintain and operate, if a cheaper aircraft can solve the same problem?

The MiG-35 is a close range fighter for maximum effect at minimum cost.

The Su-35 is still an expensive fighter, mainly intended for defense or attack at long range.

And here, defending the MiG-35, I want to bring the balance to the US Air Force. Our potential ones are armed with about 450 F-15 units of all modifications. What is an F-15? This is an all-weather fighter-bomber capable of solving approximately the same range of tasks as the Su-35.

But the F-16, which is just a light fighter, in the US Air Force, there are more than 1000 units. And in general, the universal and cheap "Falcon". Capable of carrying 9-10 tons of weapons at a range of 1 km, it is the most popular aircraft in the world. At least, that's what they think in 800 countries, which are armed with this aircraft.

The MiG-35 is in no way inferior to the F-16, and in terms of speed, rate of climb and maneuver it surpasses the American. The Su-35 can rely on earlier detection and longer-range missiles. But this is not the way to solve all problems. The heavy and not very maneuverable R-37 can be evaded, that's a fact.

It's a pity, but our Ministry of Defense does not understand that both the MiG-35 and the Su-35 should be produced. Simply because these aircraft are capable of solving different combat missions in different ways. But alas, in our country, the ability to solve all problems behind the scenes is of greater importance, and therefore RSK MiG will be left without orders. And the MiG-35 will go down in history, as many other aircraft have gone.

Not sure if this is the right way. Yes, and it is, in principle, actually over.

Artem Mikoyan, the founder of the Design Bureau, which created many MiGs, was a very mediocre aircraft designer and simply an incomparable organizer.

Family ties, government and administrative resources, all this allowed Artem Ovanesovich to build an entire empire, which became the "RSK MiG", which gave the world such outstanding aircraft as the MiG-15, MiG-17, MiG-21, MiG-25, MiG-31 and MiG-29.

But after the death of Mikoyan in 1970, the decline of the MiG began. Followers of Mikoyan outright lost the duel with representatives of the Sukhoi company, led by an evil genius aviation Mikhail Pogosyan.

By the way, few people know, but the last six general directors of RSK MiG JSC were from JSC Sukhoi Company or JSC Irkut. That is, direct competitors.

The result is layoffs. Frame loss. Practical stop experimental design work.

Even the KLA, which includes MiG, admitted that the corporation today has actually lost its importance as an independent developer of aviation equipment and has been exclusively engaged in the modernization of the MiG-15 and MiG-29 families for the past 31 years. There is no strength or opportunity for more.

At the same time, it is believed that the potential for upgrading the MiG-29 is practically exhausted. That is, further modernization does not make any financial or industrial sense. And therefore, the production of the MiG-29K will be curtailed as unnecessary, after the fulfillment of the contract with Egypt, the production of the MiG-29M2 will be curtailed, and the maintenance of the MiG-31, MiG-29K and MiG-29SMT will be given to a group from the Sukhoi company.

And on this it will be possible to say the last “sorry” to the MiG company, which has done so much to ensure that we have a clear and calm sky above us.

And the last representative created by this company, the MiG-35, will go into oblivion just like the entire company that created it.

Truly, the last flight in history.

Information

Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.

av58

-1

10 June 2022 21: 50

That’s right, we are only talking about the behind-the-scenes games of Sukhoi and the Sukhov mafia. As always, the Russian army will pay the price on the battlefield
Horfrost

+1

11 June 2022 17: 36

It is unlikely that it is half the price, it has almost the same avionics, two engines, and also requires staff.
Then the question is how many to make, 200 - 250? And this is instead of 150-180 Su 35 or Su 30cm2? If you keep an eye on the future, then you will have to resist with f35. Where the prospects of the Mig 35, to put it mildly, do not look very good compared to the Su 35. Just to be there, to save the company? Even if you look at the conflict in Ukraine, there are chances with the outdated APU, but if the F-16 is adjusted, again there will be equal chances, and then let the Su 35,30 cover the sky better.
The comment was deleted.
Devil13

+1

13 June 2022 16: 02

1. If you compare, compare correctly. Where is the fuel consumption, where is the number of suspension points and the mass of Bq? What are you comparing when you give the performance characteristics of one, but don’t give the second one, is there air in them?
2. A light fighter is really light, with 1 engine, and performs specific tasks. And not a “front-line fighter with a radius of 300 km.”
Do you also want an airplane Chernobaevka?
3. The advantage of the moment was only in the radar with AFAR. And where is this radar? He's still not here.
4. If a design bureau makes crap that doesn’t meet its objectives, should you buy planes from them?
5. If your planes differ in price not by 2 times, but in combat capabilities by 2 times, maybe it’s worth buying an expensive one that will shoot down those that are 2 times worse?
As the Northern Military District has demonstrated, Mig Ukraine doesn’t even have a chance.
6. MiG is still making the MiG-31 and aircraft based on it, the only interceptor we have. There are rumors that the MiG-41 (relatively speaking, this means a new interceptor) is in development and there is R&D.
The Mig-29K is also needed in the fleet; they no longer do drying on an aircraft carrier, and they do not carry normal weapons. And they carry 29k.
So let them do it.
If they make a competitive fighter, we can talk.
And so, this is feeding parasites.
You need to have 2 KB and competition, but not to the point of idiocy.
And in front-line aviation, there should be 1 type of aircraft. Not 2, not 5, we are not the USSR, we won’t cope.
1. Horfrost
  
  0
  
  14 June 2022 12: 39
  
  Well, the Mig-35 was probably not so weak, something at the level of the F-18. The fuel tank was raised, the radar was improved, and with the Su 35, if they use the same missiles, they will be able to launch from the same distances. Then yes, if the battle drags on it will be harder.
  It can work on the ground, protect itself too, shoot down vertical assaults, there is range for the front.
  The only question is the cost and that’s it, if they can hold +200-300 sides without strain, what’s wrong with that? If these sides do not affect purchases of Su 30-35 in any way.
Igorash

-1

14 June 2022 10: 08

SU-35 is dead over the battlefield.... MIG-35 is a stillborn child due to an attempt to transform it into a multifunctional fighter... This was only possible once - MIG-21BIS.. But the fault here is not the designers but the RF Ministry of Defense.... The country has always been rich in fools. Especially under tsarism and now....
1. Baikal57
  
  0
  
  10 July 2022 05: 55
  
  An ordinary battalion stupid man from MTS. The alcoholic drinker is 25 years old and has been quietly cheating and his pension is three times more than his parents’. Not good.
barbos

+1

14 June 2022 17: 23

This is a sign from above for them. Let them abandon manned aircraft. She hit the ceiling of human capabilities. For a long time, designing a manned aircraft has been a bunch of compromise decisions around how not to kill the pilot and how to build a control interface between the pilot and the machine.
Let them go into unmanned aircraft. Small and large. We need millions of simple, wooden drones, we need thousands of large long-range drones, options that fly into the stratosphere (the satellites also need to be induced to make rustling noise) would not be superfluous.
The comment was deleted.
1. MauZerR
  
  0
  
  29 July 2022 10: 29
  
  Uncle Misha or what? Is he still alive? Didn't your Israel die of bile?
fone

+1

18 June 2022 11: 57

The author cannot even correctly calculate the number of suspensions under the wing of the Mig-35, but tries to talk about its usefulness.
Mig-35 is still the same Mig-29, just look at the central suspension of the fuel tank. And he was sentenced not by Poghosyan, as unreasonable commentators are trying to prove, but by the loss of the Su-27 in the competition for the rival F-15. The subsequent fraud with the transfer of the aircraft to the lungs is a joke - the replacement 21bis weighed as much as two bis, but there were the same number of missiles))
Let's compare the masses of empty planes:
F-5E - 4350kg
F-16A - 6900kg
F-18A (with four hardpoints) - 9900kg
Mig-29 9-12 - 11100kg
F-15A - 11700 kg
From this comparison it is clearly seen that the Mig-29 with its 4 hardpoints was worse than the F-15A, but the good military decided not to sink the Mig company and give it the opportunity to improve the design of the aircraft. Let's see if it succeeded.
Mig-29SMT (2008) - 12400kg, six hardpoints.
F-15S (1979) - 12900 kg, eight hardpoints.
Again they didn’t catch up, although 30 years have passed. The company continues to work and in 2017 is rolling out the Mig-35. Empty weight 13000 kg, eight hardpoints! Mig made an analogue of the F-15S!
But the former competitors have gone far ahead, the F-18E is a completely different aircraft. And the European “light” competitors, who are a ton or two lighter, are pressing down from below.
Thus, the bet on a “medium-heavy” aircraft was not justified from the very beginning. It would be better if a single-engine fighter was put into production instead of the 29th..
Servisinzhener

0

20 June 2022 15: 58

The MiG-35 is outdated. Conceptually. His time would have been from the early 90s to the end of the 75s. And this is not a matter of an “evil genius”. With the advent of the Su-35 project - a “budget” fifth-generation fighter, there is no point in producing the MiG-XNUMX.
Horfrost

0

27 June 2022 00: 26

Why is the Mig 35 constantly compared to the Su 35? Will he fight against him? Yes, even if such a confrontation happens, their missiles are the same, they will see each other from a distance much more about the use of missiles, that is, the missiles will be launched from the same distances, then both will go under their own air defenses. Something similar happened in the Indo-Pakistan conflict, where the F-16s and Su 30s didn’t hit each other, they launched missiles at houses. Only a moment will be a little cheaper, and for peacetime tasks it’s a steal. Until the Su 75 began to be supplied to troops, I think 100 MiG 35 aircraft would not be superfluous in the Aerospace Forces. They would also come in handy in Ukraine, they would also shoot down the enemy’s outdated aircraft and hit the ground with winged ones.
shurshun

0

9 July 2022 00: 28

MiG-29/35 is the best domestic multifunctional fighter! Even now in the BVB he has no equal among all domestic and imported competitors. With standard avionics, which should be on the MiG-35 (meaning primarily the radar with AFAR), controlled by the thrust vector and a modified airframe using composites, it will completely dominate the air over everyone. And he (using the example of the same Rafal) should be the main IFI for the army and navy! The MiG design bureau must be preserved and continue to conduct its activities in the interests of strengthening the defense capability and military-technical superiority of the country over a potential enemy!
Baikal57

0

10 July 2022 05: 52

Volunteer battalions on the T-62 are being formed in many regions (they are better in the form of self-propelled guns with normal armor), so MiG-35 squadrons will also want wingmen out of necessity instead of the Su-70 for the Su-75/57.
Flyer_64

0

13 July 2022 23: 52

It would be interesting to read the conclusion of Lipetsk specialists on the combat use of the MiG-35. Uniformity in the videoconferencing will not lead to good things
This is the main

0

16 July 2022 14: 43

What about moment 31 and perspective moment 41?
The comment was deleted.
Igor Vivsyanik

0

22 July 2022 21: 18

It’s a pity, they ruined such an aircraft and UAC “MIG”, first they pushed aside the general director of the corporation SSKorotkov, the smartest and talented aircraft design engineer, I’ve known him since my lieutenant years, we served together in the same IAP on drying aircraft.
andrey_8

0

23 July 2022 16: 23

They said that drones are useless and received a lot of losses from the war with the holopopuas, now the geniuses from the Moscow Region are abandoning light aircraft. What other ingenious solutions await us?
alleksSalut4507

0

25 July 2022 19: 12

you're killing the MIG in vain.
MauZerR

0

29 July 2022 10: 24

But the F-15, only in the E version, is an IS, the S-shki are ordinary fighter-interceptors, as, by the way, are the Raptors (although Khryapa added the ability to throw JDAM with crutches). And the F-16 is no longer a light fighter, as was originally intended under the LWF program; gradually, as part of modernization, it became a full-fledged attack vehicle. Ours took the same concept as the United States, resulting in the Su-27 and MiG-29, but as a result the light vehicle became not entirely light (27 tons, the first F-15s weighed less) and turned out to be unnecessary.
n456

0

31 July 2022 11: 55

In training battles in Lmpetsk, Su-27 against MIG-29. Out of 10 battles, MIG won in 8. And at all distances
Valery Volkov

0

8 August 2022 21: 29

It’s a pity that we got to military aviation - we’ve finished with the civilian campaign and now military aircraft are next in line.
DO

0

12 August 2022 18: 32

In the Northern Military District, the most popular military aircraft of the Russian Armed Forces were the Su-25 attack aircraft. Accordingly, during the military operations of the Northern Military District, the greatest losses of aircraft and pilots of the Russian Federation fell precisely on attack aircraft.
Therefore, why doesn’t the MiG Design Bureau redesign the MiG-35 into an unmanned attack aircraft? At the same time, throw out or simplify many redundant components and assemblies, and add the necessary ones. For example, remove the life support systems for the pilots, leave one engine, simplify the wing mechanization, resolve the issue with the radar (install one more suitable for an attack aircraft, and maybe provide a modification without a radar). Well, add external control equipment for the drone, including satellite equipment. In the future, add a powerful on-board computer that will allow, in case of problems with the control channel, to search for and hit targets in a given square and within a given time interval.
1. DO
  
  0
  
  12 August 2022 20: 12
  
  PS
  Classic attack aircraft weapons can be supplemented by kamikaze drones (for example, Lancets, and the long-flying heavy Lancets with reconnaissance functions recently announced by the developer), delivered by an unmanned attack aircraft to a point beyond the range of Russian artillery, along the safest route and skirting the terrain, for operational hitting mobile targets.
  1. DO
    
    0
    
    12 August 2022 20: 47
    
    P.S-2
    That is, for the purpose of prompt delivery of kamikaze drones to the required point (including deep behind enemy lines), an unmanned attack aircraft delivery can fly both ways in a fully autonomous mode, without using a radio control channel, similar to a cruise missile. He flew to a given point using inertial or satellite orientation, or according to terrain marks, dropped the drones and returned home. And mobile targets will be dealt with by dropped kamikaze drones.
Stalnov I.P.

0

30 August 2022 13: 38

Both with drones and with the MIG-35, they will ruin a good fighter, and then they will run around and shake their fat asses. Uma, no, people won’t give it. STUPIDITY.
lavvtoroy

0

9 May 2023 02: 16

Now, of course, it would be really useful to wet the Natsik, but cheaper... What if the powers that be are dumbfounded and realize the mistake?
Georgy Sviridov_2

0

30 July 2023 14: 26

As I understand it, we do not have enough good flight personnel, so, as it were, they are not really increasing the number of aircraft.
Well, yes, the MiG-29 was originally created as a cover aircraft for large ground groupings of troops from enemy aircraft, that is, in the first place, it was not supposed to fight fighters, but fight front-line bombers and attack aircraft, as well as helicopters.
But until recently, no one imagined that they would have to fight with large ground groupings of troops, and even with an enemy with aviation.
And yes, Mig-35 could cover the leading edge from Su-24/24, turntables and other bayraktars, and Su-30/35 and Mig-31 would be less distracted by them, Mig-29 and Su- 27, and in the future, f-16 ...
If you load factories with long-term orders, then you need to train pilots ...
In principle, a couple of squadrons per district, and 20-25% on top to compensate for losses, this is about 120 aircraft at least what we need, not counting the interests of naval aviation, air defense aviation, and also an air wing for Kuznetsov, because there would of course be upgrade the fleet for a moment-35k ...
That is, under 200 boards ... The question is what are the capacities of the plant in bulbs ... If they can produce at least 15-20 boards a year, well, if not immediately, but reach such a volume in 3-4 years, then it makes sense, if not, and 200 aircraft will be built for 20-30 years, then there is no point in it ... Separately to train pilots for 30-40 aircraft, this is really not promising, it is one thing to retrain from the Su-30 to the Su-35, and another thing from an instant-35, for drying, you are tormented to learn, because the skill is already learned to automatism, on the subcortex, and the plane flies differently ...
But if there are a couple of hundred aircraft, then yes, it makes sense to separately recruit cadets for such a specialization ...
Georgy Sviridov_2

0

30 July 2023 15: 23

So it’s like the pack dp, it’s the same as the Mig-41, which is being developed right in the blink of an eye and will be produced at their facilities so as not to stop the production of the Su-30/34/35/57.
If they give a contract similar to the Su-57 for 70-80 aircraft, this, in principle, will allow the company to maintain both the design school and production ...
If, of course, the order will be like for a moment-35 - 6 pieces (damn nothing, 1/4 of the squadron), then of course there will be no sense in such an order ...