It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

MiG-29 OVT at Farnborough - King is Dead, Long Live The King

page: 2
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jul, 21 2006 @ 11:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by DickDasterdly

Please note this is just my off the cuff understanding. I do not claim to have any professional knowledge. So anyone can jump in and correct me.

[edit on 21-7-2006 by DickDasterdly]



Your pretty much spot on [but you don't have to bleed off all the energy], but if it comes down to a 1 vs 1, it could get your missile into the other guy before he can even sight up on you.


Before all the eejits come on with their HMS etc - at the end of the day I'd rather have the option of pointing my nose than not. Both aircraft will have HMS with similar seekers.

[edit on 21-7-2006 by kilcoo316]




posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 05:30 AM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
I've a couple of questions.
Does the OVT include any RCS reduction measures similar to those envisaged for the Su-37 Terminator?
These include RAM coatings on the compressor blades, RAM on the wing leading/trailing edge surfaces and the inlet ducts. There may also be a plasma screen infront of the radardome.

edit: Sorry, I mean either MiG-29 OVT or MiG-35 variant.


The prototipe probably no, but if ordered any production aircraft can have that (with exception of the plasma screen), as long as the client is ready to pay and is considered friendly enough to be given access to the technology. The OVT/MiG-35 can receive the full RCS reduction measures as demonstrated on Indian MiG-21-93s and the Su-35 prototipes (including RAM coating on ext weapons) . This gives it between 10-20 (for the MiG-21) times lower RCS compared to the untreated aircraft. Still not F-22 territory of course but a great step ahead compared to the possible opponents it faces and a much more sensible investment for the low budget airforces to which the plane is being marketed.


Originally posted by DickDasterdly
MiG29OVT- entertainment value only

The falling leaf maneuovre is a crowd pleaser. Actually it is a bit passe now. It was interesting the first time and less so the second and third times. One Farnborough some years ago I was watching the same routine flown by an Su27 Flanker. I was with a Typhoon pilot who then went on to explain in graphic detail what he would do to the Flanker in a combat situation. Suffice to say that it makes any aircraft a sitting duck.


Well I guess if the pilot makes the plane play a violin that will also be interesting only the first couple of times.
Why can't you see the forest behind the trees. As an aviation enthusiast you should be able to see that through the entertainment routines they are displaying the superior qualities of the airframe and its state of the art aerodynamics. The tailslides, falling lieves, somersaults, show the stable work of the engines (yes, the smoking RD-33) even when flying tail first. Throw a couple of 404s in the plane and see if you can do the same thing, engines will stall and if you're lucky you'll restart them just before you crash. And to make an operational engine with reliable 3d TVC is remarcable to say the least. That is the only system of it's kind at the moment, which puts it in a league of its own.
Any pilot is confident in the abilities of his plane but the comment you made about the Typhoon fighter brings only laughter. This type of self assurance is very unhealthy.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 05:39 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by Pazo
Actually there are only two planes that have a better chance to get a lock on the MiG-29OVT before it gets a lock on them, F-22 & F-35.


Not really, there are more, the F/A-18E/F, F-16 Block 60, and Typhoon just to name a few, all have lower RCS values than the OVT and all have a more powerful (or as powerful) radar system as the OVT.


That's pure speculation. The MiG can be ordered with the same kind or better RCS reduction measures as the ones applied to the above aircraft, you are referring to older versions without any measures taken in that direction. This is not a fair comparisson. You're way off on the assumption about the radars too. Adding the fact that the MiG-29OVT/35 can be purchased for half the price of the cheapest of the above (F-16 bl.60) I think anyone can draw their conclusions what gives you most bang for the buck, and in military terms that is always the most important factor. Correction, second most important after political and economic leverage.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 08:05 AM
link   

Originally psoted by Pazo
That's pure speculation.


How is that pure speculation? You claimed, and I quote "there are only two planes that have a better chance to get a lock on the MiG-29OVT before it gets a lock on them" which is not true, and I’m the one speculating?

Now lets go over the facts again, the Super Hornet, Block 60, and Typhoon all incorporate radar reducing measures, the Mig-29OVT or (35 Export) currently do not. From what I can find the AN/APG-80 and AN/APG-79 radars are more powerful and capable than the Tikhomirov NIIP Bars-29, the ECR-90 is at least as capable as the Bars-29 (benefit of doubt here).


Originally posted by Pazo
The MiG can be ordered with the same kind or better RCS reduction measures as the ones applied to the above aircraft, you are referring to older versions without any measures taken in that direction.


Got a source for this? The Current Mig-35 being offered for export does not incorporate any RCS reduction features. "Stealth" features can probably be added on later but that’s besides the point, the Super Hornet can also be made stealthier but I’m not discussing that version now am I?


Originally posted by Pazo
You're way off on the assumption about the radars too.


Please prove me wrong.


Originally posted by Pazo
Adding the fact that the MiG-29OVT/35 can be purchased for half the price of the cheapest of the above (F-16 bl.60) I think anyone can draw their conclusions what gives you most bang for the buck, and in military terms that is always the most important factor.


Err… you sure about that? Either the Mig-29OVT is really inexpensive of your using some bad figures here. Besides, you get what you pay for, if a country like the UAE can afford 80 Block 60’s others should too. Where did you say you live again?
And don’t try to wiggle out; this is about the Mig-29OVT and what it can supposedly lock on, not about affordability issues.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 08:36 AM
link   
Westy, the MiG-29 M1 did incorporate limited RCS reduction techniques, the M2, which the OVT is based on, contained much more. I was wondering if the OVT/35 contained yet more than the two previous fulcrum updates.


I think Pazo is suggesting the parts are available, and its up to the customer to specify whether they want them all/none/somewhere in between.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 08:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
Westy, the MiG-29 M1 did incorporate limited RCS reduction techniques, the M2, which the OVT is based on, contained much more.


Sure, but not the same level of reduction seen in the Hornet, Typhoon and the F-16.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   
Westie,
Yes, you are speculating. Have you proved your views to demand proof from me, you darn well know that unless those planes are properly tested against each other, there's no way you can prove anything you claim, so you speculate.
''Got Sources?" Yes I do, but if I have to dig out a link to back every single opinion I have, it's just not worth it, I post on this forum while working, don't exactly have time to play Alie McBeal. I post my views if I have something to say, I don't demand people to accept my views, so I don't feel it necessary to back claims which I consider common logic. We know the Russians have the technology, it was successfully tested, fairly simple to apply, so what's so strange if they sell it, if the customer is not trustworthy, he's not going to get the full nine yards. Do you think if the US sells Superhornets to India they will be the same spec as the ones for USNavy. BTW if India orders the MiG-35 they WILL get the 'deluxe' package, what do you think they are stupid? they had a taste of these measures applied to the MIG-21s, they will want a piece of the pie, whether this is publicly announced or not. And they will get it because the Russians are so desperate to get this deal that they can't afford to say no.

The last part of their post was very entertaining. If the UAE can afford 80 bl 60's, anyone should

It might come as a surprize to you, but those guys wearing white sheets are actually loaded, they can afford things the US can not afford to sell to them...
So If I have to be ashamed that my country is poorer than UAE... I'm sorry but I'm not. It's not that we can't afford F-16s, we can and we most probably will buy some, because of political leverage, but it would be bad for us, as I said earlier, we are a peaceful country and don't need bombtrucks.
The MiG-29OVT is by no means inexpensive, but it's not overpriced like the F-16. I guess if the Russians had the political leverage the US has, they would sell it for more than it's worth, but they don't, so right now the MiG-35 is Best Buy my friend.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by Pazo]



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23

Originally posted by kilcoo316
Westy, the MiG-29 M1 did incorporate limited RCS reduction techniques, the M2, which the OVT is based on, contained much more.


Sure, but not the same level of reduction seen in the Hornet, Typhoon and the F-16.


You weren't 'sure' on your previous post. Now you accept kilcoo's opinion without asking him 'Got Sources?' I'm feeling discriminated here.
Again you are speculating, "not the same level seen"??? Where did you see this. Or you believe only what you want to believe.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 09:49 AM
link   

Originally posted by kilcoo316
Westy, the MiG-29 M1 did incorporate limited RCS reduction techniques, the M2, which the OVT is based on, contained much more. I was wondering if the OVT/35 contained yet more than the two previous fulcrum updates.


I think Pazo is suggesting the parts are available, and its up to the customer to specify whether they want them all/none/somewhere in between.


Small correction, M2 is the two seat multi role variant, the OVT is actually one of the M1 prototypes, with added TVC.
Actually both the engines and the RCS reduction techniques can be applied to both the M1 & M2, it's a pretty flexible package. The RCS reduction can be applied to any fighter (older MIG-29s, 21's 23's all the Sukhoi family with more or less success, but the TVC/OVT RD-33 engines can only be used on M variants of the MIG-29 because the older (A/C/CM/CMT) have analogue, rather than FBW control system, which cannot work with TVC.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 10:01 AM
link   
Oh, ok.


I thought the original Mig-29M was produced years ago, back in the early 90s, and the M2 was a further update around the new millenium.



Ahh, I see my mistake now, the -29M is different from the 29M1 [single seat] and M2 [2 seat].

I thought the numbers differentiated between updates



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pazo
Yes, you are speculating. Have you proved your views to demand proof from me, you darn well know that unless those planes are properly tested against each other, there's no way you can prove anything you claim, so you speculate.


So this whole argument is over nothing then. Since by this admission you have invalidated your original claim over which all this started? In the context of this topic and by the inherent limits thereof you cannot definitively "prove" something once way or another, but we can come to a reasonable conclusion, which is what I’m attempting to do. BTW I can back up everything I’ve said to a reasonable level, the only thing which I couldn’t find solid sources on was the cost of various fighters.


Originally posted by Pazo
''Got Sources?" Yes I do, but if I have to dig out a link to back every single opinion I have, it's just not worth it, I post on this forum while working, don't exactly have time to play Alie McBeal.


Stating something as fact, which is what you did, differs from just stating your own personal opinion. Even opinions can be wrong and you should be able to back them up if challenged.


Originally posted by Pazo
I post my views if I have something to say, I don't demand people to accept my views, so I don't feel it necessary to back claims which I consider common logic. We know the Russians have the technology, it was successfully tested, fairly simple to apply, so what's so strange if they sell it, if the customer is not trustworthy, he's not going to get the full nine yards.


Common sense? What your attempting to do is say Plane X was tested with this technology and Country Y probably has this technology so since Plane Z is from Country Y it must incorporate said technology and will be offered as such to export customers. That’s not common sense that a huge leap in assumption and again pure speculation. BTW I’m still interested in this "deluxe" package you keep referring to.


Originally posted by Pazo
Again you are speculating, "not the same level seen"??? Where did you see this. Or you believe only what you want to believe.


Umm…it’s called looking it up, compare the RCS reducing featured on the Super Hornet and Typhoon with the ones featured in the Mig-29M1&2 airframes. The Mig-29M2 should have a reduced frontal RCS, no solid figures as of yet but lower than previous versions. However I cannot find any mention of the RCS reduction features of the M2 being transferred over to the OVT, they are different programs.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 11:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by WestPoint23
So this whole argument is over nothing then. Since by this admission you have invalidated you original claim over which all this started? In the context of this topic and by the inherent limits thereof you cannot definitively "prove" something once way or another, but we can come to a reasonable conclusion, which is what I’m attempting to do. BTW I can back up everything I’ve said to a reasonable level, the only thing which I couldn’t find solid sources on was the cost of various fighters.


Not over nothing, it started because you desperately need to find something bad about a great package, just because it's not coming from the US. That's your problem and I'm sorry I dragged this. Question, who determines what is a solid source?


Originally posted by WestPoint23
Stating something as fact, which is what you did, differs from just stating your own personal opinion. Even opinions can be wrong and you should be able to back them up if challenged.


Yet you took Kilcoo's opinion as a fact, but asked me for proof, double standard?. You see, people challenge almost anything I've said here, I don't have the time to make a case for any statement I make, so automatically I'm wrong, fine, if it suits you?


Originally posted by WestPoint23
Common sense? What your attempting to do is say Plane X was tested with this technology and Country Y probably has this technology so since Plane Z is from Country Y it must incorporate said technology and will be offered as such to export customers. That’s not common sense that a huge leap in assumption and again pure speculation. BTW I’m still interested in this "deluxe" package you keep referring to.


You are contradicting yourself, you admit that lowered RCS on MIG-29 is a fact after Kilcoo confirmed it, but the above is 'a huge leap in assumption'. Make up your mind.
By deluxe package I meant Low RCS features + TVC. The 'vanilla' package is without those.



Originally posted by WestPoint23
Umm…it’s called looking it up, compare the RCS reducing featured on the Super Hornet and Typhoon with the ones featured in the Mig-29M1&2 airframes. The Mig-29M2 should have a reduced frontal RCS, no solid figures as of yet but lower than previous versions. However I cannot find any mention of the RCS reduction features of the M2 being transferred over to the OVT, they are different programs.


Well according to some(Russian) sources (actually can't remember where exactly I read it, I read a lot), the Superhornets RCS is 6 times less than Hornet?. Only thing I read about the measures the Russians are using is that they lower the RCS of a given aircraft 10-20 times (depending on aircraft). So it all depends on what do you think is a solid source. Bottom line, MiG-29 can fight BVR in the same league as the Superhornet, but not with F-22, is that a reasonable conclusion?
Who told you OVT/M2/M1 are different programs, these are different components of the same program (Mig-29M which started in the 80's) M1 is the single seater, M2 is the 2 seater, OVT is a demonstrator for the TVC engine, the 'K' is the navalized version. If you want to purchase a new MiG-29, you can have all of this features. For instance the Indians are most interested in the M2 version and the K version. If they want TVC and low RCS features they can be ordered for both versions.



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 11:19 AM
link   
A couple of weeks ago in what looked to be an unrestricted display and it stole the show.

It made the Gripen, Typhoon, Super Hornet, F-16 and F-15 displays look ordinary I have to say.

Oh and the sweet noise.....



[edit on 25-7-2006 by neformore]



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 11:48 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pazo
Not over nothing, it started because you desperately need to find something bad about a great package, just because it's not coming from the US. That's your problem and I'm sorry I dragged this. Question, who determines what is a solid source?


Yeah right, it started because you made a false claim by stating that the Mig-29OVT can lock onto all fighters but two before they can do the same. I assumed linear non support BVR scenario.

A solid source can either be a dedicated military information website, and or news sites, and or a general information site which has credible references. An example of a source which is not credible would be something like Bob’s Mig-29 home page, and or Poster X’s comments on a blog or forum somewhere.


Originally posted by Pazo
Yet you took Kilcoo's opinion as a fact, but asked me for proof, double standard?. You see, people challenge almost anything I've said here, I don't have the time to make a case for any statement I make, so automatically I'm wrong, fine, if it suits you?


No, I checkout out Kilcoo’s post and guess what? The M2 does incorporate RCS reduction features (Link); the OVT from what I’ve read does not incorporate those features. And you still have yet to back up the claim that it will be offered for export with RCS reduction features. If you don’t have the time to support what you say then you shouldn’t claim something, which again is exactly what you did, don’t make me quote the post again.


Originally posted by Pazo
You are contradicting yourself, you admit that lowered RCS on MIG-29 is a fact after Kilcoo confirmed it, but the above is 'a huge leap in assumption'. Make up your mind. By deluxe package I meant Low RCS features + TVC. The 'vanilla' package is without those.


I said RCS reduction features on the Mig-29M2 are a fact, not on the Mig-29OVT, if you didn’t understand my post let me simplify then, Plane X was the M2 and Plane Z was the OVT. What you're claiming is like trying to say the F-16A incorporates the same RCS reduction features as the F-16C because they are both F-16’s. Again, please post a source confirming that the Russians are offering a Mig-29OVT with RCS reducing features. The point is not what is theoretically possible but what is the current configuration being offered.


Originally posted by Pazo
Well according to some(Russian) sources (actually can't remember where exactly I read it, I read a lot), the Superhornets RCS is 6 times less than Hornet?. Only thing I read about the measures the Russians are using is that they lower the RCS of a given aircraft 10-20 times (depending on aircraft). So it all depends on what do you think is a solid source. Bottom line, MiG-29 can fight BVR in the same league as the Superhornet, but not with F-22, is that a reasonable conclusion?


The Super Hornet is stealthier than the C/D but public figures are only speculative, I can post those if you want? What the Russians claim may or may not be true, but even giving them the benefit of the doubt that they can lower the frontal RCS by 10 fold you have to remember that the RCS of their fighters to begin with was huge.

Now, why are you all of a sudden not being specific? If I recall this discussion was about the OVT, so no, the OVT is not in the same league with the Block II Hornet when it comes to BVR, as it stand now its outclassed in the radar and stealth categories. Even if we exclude weapons and avionics and even if for the sake of argument we say that the Mig-29OVT has the same RCS as the Super Hornet its radar still cannot match the AN/APG-79.


Originally posted by Pazo
Who told you OVT/M2/M1 are different programs, these are different components of the same program (Mig-29M which started in the 80's) M1 is the single seater, M2 is the 2 seater, OVT is a demonstrator for the TVC engine, the 'K' is the navalized version.


What I mean is that not all the version are the same, the M2 has RCS reduction features the OVT does not, apart from obvious airframe differences of course.

[edit on 25-7-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 25 2006 @ 01:17 PM
link   
I doubt that the MiG-29OVT has the amount of RCS-reducing measures as the Super Hornet. The thing that most stands out are the intakes on the MiG. Even though the insides might be covered in RAM, those fan blades are still clearly seen. The SH also employs serrated edges on the landing gear doors, reshaped tailplanes, and IR-reducing nozzles.

Then again, the OVT is a smaller fighter so that helps out.

BVR would be tough against a Block II SH equipped with AESA and the AIM-120D. The OVT is a very good deal for what it is. It is a lot cheaper than the SH, is deadly in a WVR fight and has some pretty nice feautures. But, given the choice of the two planes to go to battle, I'd pick the SH.

BTW, Pazo what country are you from?

[edit on 25-7-2006 by JFrazier]



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 02:28 AM
link   
Westie, weren't you listening Man, The OVT and M2 are not like F-16A & C.
It's the same frickin' plane. The M2 is a demonstrator for the 2 seat version, the OVT is the demonstrator for the TVC engine (that's why its called OVT, that's Russian for TVC). If you actually read my posts you will see that I said that the OVT prototype does not have RAM, because its meant to demonstrate the engine, not RCS reduction materials. If you buy a plane, it would not be called OVT, that's a feature, not a name. It will be called MiG-33 if you order the non TVC version or MiG-35 with the TVC. RCS reduction featuress are a subject of customer specification on both. You can get a M2 without RAM, or M1 with it, or a 'K' with TVC. Not sure how effective the RAMs will be on the 'K', since some RAMs don't get along too well with sea water (that obviously doesn't apply to the SH:up


By "Russian planes have huge RCS to begin with" you mean it's 10 times bigger than the American planes and if they reduce it tenfold that would only make it close to the non stealthy American planes. Poor Miggies.

OK for the last time, actually read my posts.
I said quote: There are only two planes that have a BETTER CHANCE(meaning decisive edge) of getting a lock....
The Superhornet might or might not get a lock first, if you are right that it's radar is better, it probably will, if I'm right and it's not, it probably won't. At best it would come down to chance. That's why I said you were speculating. Of course you think you're right because you trust your sources, well surprize, not everyone does. Some people actually consider the majority of the so called aircraft related sites to be quite biased and one sided. So kill me.



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 02:35 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrazier
The thing that most stands out are the intakes on the MiG. Even though the insides might be covered in RAM, those fan blades are still clearly seen.



I know Shukoi investigated putting RAM on the compressor blades themselves, and seem to be carrying this method forward onto the Su-37.


I'm not sure if its on the updated MiG-29s though.



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by JFrazier
I doubt that the MiG-29OVT has the amount of RCS-reducing measures as the Super Hornet. The thing that most stands out are the intakes on the MiG. Even though the insides might be covered in RAM, those fan blades are still clearly seen. The SH also employs serrated edges on the landing gear doors, reshaped tailplanes, and IR-reducing nozzles.

Well the fan blades are also treated as far as I know and I think Kilcoo confirmed this too in one of his posts. IR-reducing nozzles would help the SH a lot, from behind, the MIG's IRST has greater range than the radar, so that's a big plus for the SH


Originally posted by JFrazier
Then again, the OVT is a smaller fighter so that helps out..

Yes, but according to the all knowing Westie, it has huge RCS


Originally posted by JFrazier
BVR would be tough against a Block II SH equipped with AESA and the AIM-120D.

Never said the opposite. Yet again, I feel a lot of people here underestimate the abilities of the latest Russian radars. Lets not forget they had the first production phased array radar (MIG-31). The assumption of some sites about the specs of the units in the new M's are more the fruit of wishes, than facts.


Originally posted by JFrazier
The OVT is a very good deal for what it is. It is a lot cheaper than the SH, is deadly in a WVR fight and has some pretty nice feautures. But, given the choice of the two planes to go to battle, I'd pick the SH.

Wouldn't you rather have 2 MiG-29M's with cash to spare. 2 planes means double the capability. Do you honestly beleive the SH is 2.5 times more effective than a MiG-29M. In theory maybe...


Originally posted by JFrazier
BTW, Pazo what country are you from?


I will answer you in a u2u. Don't want any dislike of me to be turned against my small but beautiful country



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 08:10 AM
link   

Originally posted by Pazo
The Superhornet might or might not get a lock first, if you are right that it's radar is better, it probably will, if I'm right and it's not, it probably won't.


Look Pazo, with all due respect, IMO the AN/APG-79 is more capable than the Bars-29, right now the 79 is one of the most capable fighter radars you can get. (Excluding AN/APG-81). So I’d have to say that an AESA Block II Hornet will have a decisive edge over a Mig-29 in BVR. I say that because according to my sources the RCS and radar of a SH is better than those of a Mig-29. If you don’t trust my sources, well nothing I can do about that.


Originally posted by Pazo
Yes, but according to the all knowing Westie, it has huge RCS


Look, its slightly smaller, but that isn’t that great of a factor when your talking about RCS, it helps but not much. The Mig-29’s have a lot of features which more than cancel out the size difference. The ADM-20 is 12 feet long yet has a RCS figure similar to that of a B-52.


Originally posted by Pazo
I feel a lot of people here underestimate the abilities of the latest Russian radars.


Ok then, why don’t you post what you think the capabilities of the Bars-29 are, since you don’t agree with popular sources.

[edit on 26-7-2006 by WestPoint23]



posted on Jul, 26 2006 @ 10:13 AM
link   
Westie, I give up man,
If you need reasurance that anything Made in USA is better than anything else, please turn to someone else. My interest in aviation doesn't have any patriotic foundations. My country doesn't make planes since the 40's so I don't NEED the Mig to be better than the SH, I simply THINK it is. You on the other hand, desperately NEED the SH to be better, so you THINK it is. Which is worse, you demand others to think like you.

You might want to check this article about the SH (and F-14). It is quite long, but interesting. It doesn't talk about its RCS or radar but has interesting views on other qualities of the plane
www.findarticles.com...
It's by Rear Adm. Paul Gillcrist U.S. Navy (Ret.) and Bob Kress



new topics

top topics



 
0
<< 1    3 >>

log in

join