Read the forum code of contact
By: 9th February 2017 at 14:21 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-If you do not require excessive combat loads or extreme range, then the Super Fulcrum is a good option. But I'd wait for a decent phased array radar first, the Zhuk-ME is so retro.
By: 9th February 2017 at 15:27 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-If you do not require excessive combat loads or extreme range, then the Super Fulcrum is a good option. But I'd wait for a decent phased array radar first, the Zhuk-ME is so retro
Also, if you already operate the Fulcrum (Peru) is a logical choice as money is saved on infrastructure/creation of a supply chain.
By: 9th February 2017 at 15:53 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-In the case you are a small/poor/landlocked nation (except Kazahstan or Ethiopia) Mig-35, if you are one with a great sea surface to patrol,Su-30, anything in between (Ethiopia also there )Su-27/35, Kasakhstan MiG-31.
Look also at what Russia do: Central area and all the northernmost Bases have Mig-31, Eastern Su-27 and -30, Mig-29 are mostly in Southern one and in Kaliningrad, Western one a fancy mix, Sevastopol being a Navy location going Su-30.
By: 9th February 2017 at 16:05 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-In the case you are a small/poor/landlocked nation (except Kazahstan or Ethiopia) Mig-35, if you are one with a great sea surface to patrol,Su-30, anything in between (Ethiopia also there )Su-27/35, Kasakhstan MiG-31.
Look also at what Russia do: Central area and all the northernmost Bases have Mig-31, Eastern Su-27 and -30, Mig-29 are mostly in Southern one and in Kaliningrad, Western one a fancy mix, Sevastopol being a Navy location going Su-30.
Also, if you already operate the Fulcrum (Peru) is a logical choice as money is saved on infrastructure/creation of a supply chain.
Yes but in reality it didn't happen like that.
Belarus - small and landlocked. No Flankers (they retired them) but has Fulcrums. They will choose the Su-30SM instead of the MiG-35 as their next aircraft
Egypt - somewhat big with maritime areas, should choose su-30 or 35 but chose the MiG-35 instead
By: 9th February 2017 at 16:41 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Combat Potency, MiG-35 - AESA:
dog fight: Su-30MKM (1.25), the Su-35 (1.93), the MiG-35 (1.64)
long-range air combat: Su-30MKM (0.92), the Su-35S (1.9), the MiG-35 (1.44)
attack ground targets: Su-30MKM (1.09), the Su-35S (1.53), the MiG-35 (1.27)
Self-Defense: Su-30MKM (0.62), the Su-35S (0.81), the MiG-35 (0.77)
Total capacity:
Su-30MKM 1.25 * 0.92 * 1.09 * 0.62 = 0.78
Su-35S 1.93 * 1.9 * 1.53 * 0.81 = 4.54
MiG-35 1.64 * 1.44 * 1.27 * 0.77 = 2.31
cost of (the domestic price / external price)
Su-30MKM 50 million. $ / 80 million. $ / 1.6
Su-35S 42 million. $ / 62.5 million. $ / 1.25
MiG-35 31 million. $ / 50 million. $ / 1.0
Efficiency / Cost:
Su-30MKM 0.78 / 1.6 = 0.49
MiG-35 2.31 / 1.0 = 2.31
Su-35S 4.54 / 1.25 = 3.63
Su-35s - the best choice
By: 9th February 2017 at 17:32 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Yes but in reality it didn't happen like that.Belarus - small and landlocked. No Flankers (they retired them) but has Fulcrums. They will choose the Su-30SM instead of the MiG-35 as their next aircraft
Egypt - somewhat big with maritime areas, should choose su-30 or 35 but chose the MiG-35 instead
MIG35 has to go through Ruaf for few years . Su30SM already in production.
By: 9th February 2017 at 17:34 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Combat Potency, MiG-35 - AESA:
dog fight: Su-30MKM (1.25), the Su-35 (1.93), the MiG-35 (1.64)
long-range air combat: Su-30MKM (0.92), the Su-35S (1.9), the MiG-35 (1.44)attack ground targets: Su-30MKM (1.09), the Su-35S (1.53), the MiG-35 (1.27)
Self-Defense: Su-30MKM (0.62), the Su-35S (0.81), the MiG-35 (0.77)Total capacity:
Su-30MKM 1.25 * 0.92 * 1.09 * 0.62 = 0.78
Su-35S 1.93 * 1.9 * 1.53 * 0.81 = 4.54
MiG-35 1.64 * 1.44 * 1.27 * 0.77 = 2.31cost of (the domestic price / external price)
Su-30MKM 50 million. $ / 80 million. $ / 1.6
Su-35S 42 million. $ / 62.5 million. $ / 1.25
MiG-35 31 million. $ / 50 million. $ / 1.0Efficiency / Cost:
Su-30MKM 0.78 / 1.6 = 0.49
MiG-35 2.31 / 1.0 = 2.31
Su-35S 4.54 / 1.25 = 3.63Su-35s - the best choice
Still have to be considered the operative cost however.
By: 9th February 2017 at 18:18 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Still have to be considered the operative cost however.
Su-30 20000 - 25000 $ / hour flight
Su-35S 10000 - 15000 $ / hour flight (presumably)
MiG-35 7500 $ / hour flight
By: 9th February 2017 at 20:04 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Given India's experience with the Su-30MKI and the MiG-29K, I think its a no-brainer. The Su-30 would be what I would go with. More capable, more range, more payload, more mature and way better serviceability and reliability.
By: 9th February 2017 at 20:12 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Yes but in reality it didn't happen like that.Belarus - small and landlocked. No Flankers (they retired them) but has Fulcrums. They will choose the Su-30SM instead of the MiG-35 as their next aircraft
Egypt - somewhat big with maritime areas, should choose su-30 or 35 but chose the MiG-35 instead
Its kind of like asking if a country would prefer F-16's over F-18's. A properly balanced out air force would want both.
By: 9th February 2017 at 20:16 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Su-30 20000 - 25000 $ / hour flight
Su-35S 10000 - 15000 $ / hour flight (presumably)
MiG-35 7500 $ / hour flight
And the percentage gap between F-16 operating costs and F 18 operating cost would be similar.
Its not one or the other. A properly balanced air force would have A-10's , F-16's and F-15's. A proper Russian built force would have Frogfoots, Fulcrums and Flankers.
By: 9th February 2017 at 20:35 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-The difference in range between Su-30 and MiG-29M/35 is not as great as some forum members would like to think. Su-30SM/MKI maximum range is 3000km. MiG-29M/35's range on internal fuel is 2000km, but with the new enlarged centerline drop tank it should reach about 2800km. So the real question is how often the airforces fielding Flankers, routinely operate with maximum fuel capacity and maximum payload.
By: 9th February 2017 at 21:45 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Su-30 20000 - 25000 $ / hour flight
Su-35S 10000 - 15000 $ / hour flight (presumably)
MiG-35 7500 $ / hour flight
The numbers for the Su-30 don't make much sense.. obviously a different way of cost calculation.
Based on the USAF figures, a mission cost for an F-15E is "only" ~25% more than that of an F-16C. I expect similar difference here..
By: 10th February 2017 at 04:57 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-The numbers for the Su-30 don't make much sense.. obviously a different way of cost calculation
MiG-29 - 15000 $ / hour flight, for the foreign customers - 30000 $ / hour flight
By: 10th February 2017 at 08:52 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Combat Potency, MiG-35 - AESA:
dog fight: Su-30MKM (1.25), the Su-35 (1.93), the MiG-35 (1.64)
long-range air combat: Su-30MKM (0.92), the Su-35S (1.9), the MiG-35 (1.44)attack ground targets: Su-30MKM (1.09), the Su-35S (1.53), the MiG-35 (1.27)
Self-Defense: Su-30MKM (0.62), the Su-35S (0.81), the MiG-35 (0.77)
I've no idea how you came up with these numbers.
the MKI/MKM/SM or whatever, currently has the most proven ground attack capabilities, so I'm not sure why it's rated so low.
did you just make random numbers
By: 10th February 2017 at 13:55 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Su-30 20000 - 25000 $ / hour flight
Su-35S 10000 - 15000 $ / hour flight (presumably)
MiG-35 7500 $ / hour flight
Why the big gap on Su-30SM and Su-35s?
2 vs 1 crew?
By: 10th February 2017 at 14:31 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Why the big gap on Su-30SM and Su-35s?So what?
2 vs 1 crew?
By: 10th February 2017 at 14:37 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-Why the big gap on Su-30SM and Su-35s?
2 vs 1 crew?
Changed the principle of service, the Su-30 - "service under the rules of" (обслуживание по регламенту), Su-35s and MiG-35 - "condition maintenance" (обслуживание по техническому состоянию), perhaps this is the reason
By: 10th February 2017 at 14:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-I've no idea how you came up with these numbers.
What is the problem? ask me
By: 10th February 2017 at 14:40 Permalink - Edited 1st January 1970 at 01:00
-So what?
I don't know about salleries in Russians AF.
But if this would have been in Norway, the difference with paying one vs two crew would be quite telling.
Besides, we are talking flight cost per hour on average. That would be with training or re-training cost for new systems.
Posts: 2,040
By: Y-20 Bacon - 9th February 2017 at 14:13
For those countries that usually buy Russian, they are usually end up with the choice of new Fulcrum variants or new Flanker variants competing with each other.
which would you choose if you were in that position?