India get the first 3 MiG29UPG fighters

[MilSpec]

For the one who claim this mig is ugly, i would dis agree.... I think it looks pretty damn cool. I grew up in awe of watching this beautiful aircraft in almost every week in air... I remember most of us could recognize most of jets from their sound, without looking up.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

it's ugly from side angle..otherwise it's a beautiful jet.

 

[sancho]

I, think the spine carries both an ECM suite, and a fuel tank. Its called the "hunchback".

Partially, but the main reason for it was to increse the internal fuel and offers now the same advantages as CFTs (increased range and endurance, freeing hardpoints, reducing the drag and RCS).

 

[SQ8]

Partially, but the main reason for it was to increse the internal fuel and offers now the same advantages as CFTs (increased range and endurance, freeing hardpoints, reducing the drag and RCS).

If you think about it, It is a CFT that is simply fixed.
The Block-60's CFT's for eg, are probably never going to be removed due to the hundreds of connections that go into them(they are different from the CFT's in Block-52+).
So in a way they are permanent too.

 

[The A-5]

Partially, but the main reason for it was to increse the internal fuel and offers now the same advantages as CFTs (increased range and endurance, freeing hardpoints, reducing the drag and RCS).

Hello sir,

Do you think its possible to add CFTs mounted on the sides of the two engine nacelles? Like those
on the F-15E Strike Eagle? Such a config can be useful for both MiG-29 and Su-30MKI as well (probably
MKI doesn't need it cuz it already has great range).

 

[PRINCE_THE_SHOWSTOPPER]

"sancho" i have two questions one on topic and the other off
1) on topic : what are the differences between SMT and UPG???
2) off topic : why is IAF not considering 3-4 sqds of Su-35BM like china??? aren't these very potent aircrafts??

 

[sancho]

If you think about it, It is a CFT that is simply fixed.
The Block-60's CFT's for eg, are probably never going to be removed due to the hundreds of connections that go into them(they are different from the CFT's in Block-52+).
So in a way they are permanent too.

As I said, they are more comparable to CFTs because it is just an easy modification to the baseline design, while stretching the airframe would be the other option and would be more complicated. It is true that CFTs on other fighters are removable, but the aim of the modification is the same.

Hello sir,

Do you think its possible to add CFTs mounted on the sides of the two engine nacelles? Like those
on the F-15E Strike Eagle? Such a config can be useful for both MiG-29 and Su-30MKI as well (probably
MKI doesn't need it cuz it already has great range).

Not possible for both, because of their gear bays, that are located in the same area and as you said, for the Flanker it's not needed anyway.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

"sancho" i have two questions one on topic and the other off
1) on topic : what are the differences between SMT and UPG???
2) off topic : why is IAF not considering 3-4 sqds of Su-35BM like china??? aren't these very potent aircrafts??

1) The IAF MiG-29 upgrade concept complies
with the one adopted by the Russian Air
Force to its MiG-29SMTs that have been in
service since 2009 and well-mastered by
Russian military pilots. At the same time,
the composition of the avionics and weapon
suites of the upgraded IAF MiG-29s will
have a high degree of commonality with the
carrierborne MiG-29K/KUB fighters that
have entered service with Indian Navy on
19 February 2010. Foreign-made avionics
was integrated with the avionics suite of the
MiG-29UPG at the customer’s request (the
so-called ‘international avionics suite&#8217. The
manufacturer has already got such an
experience that has proven itself under
Russo-Indian contracts for upgrade of the
MiG-21UPG Bison fighters as well as
development and manufacture of the
Su-30MKI and MiG-29K/KUB fighters.
The fire control system of the MiG-29UPG is
wrapped around the advanced slotted-array
Zhuk-M2E radar from Phazotron-NIIR Corp.
and OLS-UEM IRST sensor with the laser,
thermal-imaging and television capabilities
from NIIPP (similar radar and IRST are used
in the MiG-29K/KUB). The cockpit
management system is based on full-colour
multifunction liquid-crystal displays. The
international segment of the avionics suite
comprises a Thales helmet-mounted target
designator, a Sagem inertial/satellite
navigation system, an Indian EW system
and an Israeli ECM station, with the same
system installed in the MiG-29K/KUB.
The basic weapons suite of the MiG-29UPG
is the same as that of the MiG-29SMT and
MiG-29K/KUB. Unlike the weapons suite of
the standard MiG-29, it has RVV-AE air-to-
air active radar homing missiles and air-to-
surface precision-guided munitions, such as
Kh-29T general-purpose TV-homing
missiles, Kh-31A antiship active radar-
homing missiles, Kh-31P antiradiation
missiles, KAB-500Kr TV-homing smart
bombs, etc.

Take-off Magazine : Indian MiG-29 upgrade
2) su35 does not offer significant advantages over su30mki, which any way is going to get upgraded to be more or less equal to su35 capabilities. so India rejected the Russian offer of su35 and invested in t50.

 

[sancho]

"sancho" i have two questions one on topic and the other off
1) on topic : what are the differences between SMT and UPG???
2) off topic : why is IAF not considering 3-4 sqds of Su-35BM like china??? aren't these very potent aircrafts??

SMT is the designation when you order new Mig 29s of this generation, the UPG is just an upgraded of older versions to the same technical level, be it with internal changes like the Zhuk ME radar, or external once like the added fuel tanks or IFR probe.
Because the technical capability of Su 35 further upgrades of the MKI, so it's not a big difference and with the Super 30 upgrade they will even surpass the Su 35 in certain fields. For China on the other hand, Su 35 offers many capabilities that they don't have yet and need for their stealth fighters and further developments, be it radar, Supercruise, or TVC.

 

[Agnostic_Indian]

aren't mig-29UPG supposed to have smokeless engines?

• Powerplant : The original RD-33 engines
would be replaced by RD-33 series 3
engines, which would be produced by HAL
under license. These engines no longer
smoke, require lesser maintenance, come
with a FADEC (a computerized system for
controlling the engine) and offer slightly
better fuel economy.


Eppur Si Muove !: The Fulcrum Upgrade

 

[Evgeny]

Only 10 of MiG29 will be upgraded in Russia, other 55 will be upgraded in India.

 

[Sergi]

During a dogfight or a low level flight in the range of AAA, one bullet in this and you can kiss the air craft goodbye. I, know for a fact,its for EW suite, mostly the fuel is carried internally. Having, drop tanks down below and a tank right on the top is a huge God damn risk.

Aren't fuel tanks self sealing ???

 

[Kompromat]

Aren't fuel tanks self sealing ???

Only, if the jet fuel doesn't blow up, which we know how likely it is. Direct hits into the tanks, usually end up in a fireball.

 

[MiG-21]

During a dogfight or a low level flight in the range of AAA, one bullet in this and you can kiss the air craft goodbye. I, know for a fact,its for EW suite, mostly the fuel is carried internally. Having, drop tanks down below and a tank right on the top is a huge God damn risk.

If you are going to worry about the fuel tanks worry about the huge ones inside the wings of every jet fighter. During a dogfight there are more chances of gun rounds hitting the internal wing tanks than the spine tank since the wings/wing-tanks have a much larger surface area. And for low level flights, the aircraft doesn't fly upside down.

Even while avoiding a missile, the aircraft flies perpendicular to the missile's vector exposing it's underbelly, and not its back.

The MiG-29B versions(which the IAF has) cannot drop its centerline fuel tank. This was only corrected in the MiG-29S version and the SMT upgrade. However even in that version the MiG bureau solved the problem of exposed underbelly fuel tank by first consuming all the fuel in the centerline tank and only then the wing drop tanks(if any), totally reverse of other fighters.
During bombing runs or even during dogfights, the fighters drop their tanks and only then engage the target.

2) su35 does not offer significant advantages over su30mki, which any way is going to get upgraded to be more or less equal to su35 capabilities. so India rejected the Russian offer of su35 and invested in t50.

Actually it does offer an advantage, which happens to be the most important one, its massively powerful radar. And its engines. And its strengthened Airframe. The Super Sukhoi Upgrade is definitely going to bridge this gap for sure, with strengthened Airframe and engines(work is going on to increase the thrust without increasing the diameter). However the AESA on the Super Sukhoi may not have the huge range of the IRBIS on the Su-35S since Russians are novice in the AESA department. But being an AESA it has its own standard AESA advantages over IRBIS PESA.

 

[MiG-21]

And the HMSD...

Cheers!

MiG-29UPG isn't getting Topsight. It is only getting a Sh-3UM-1(Shchel). MiG-29Bs had the Sh-3UM. Most likely they didn't even change the entire helmet/dashboard setup and only some components in Shchel to make them compatible with the new Zhuk radar and new generation of R-73 missiles. This is because probably the french were asking exorbitant prices for the Topsights... and also unnecessary taking into account the IAF MiG-29s are already beyond their service lives. Their original airframe life of 2500 hours was long expended when IAF flew them at 150 - 200 hours each year from the mid 1990s to present, and around 100 hours each year from 1987 to mid 1990s due to the initial batch of engines which were giving problems. First MiG-29s arrived in early 1987. Now you do the math. But that is only for normal peacetime hours. Take into account the hours logged when these fighters were widely deployed in several 4 ship formations(normal peacetime is 2 MiGs) in the Kargil war escorting Mirages, Jaguars, MiG-27s and MiG-23s while chasing away F-16s by scaring the $hit outta them with lockons. Now this upgrade also extends the already beyond limit creaking Airframes for a further 1000 hours. The IAF is now going to fly them for another 15 years with only an average of 66 hours each year so as to not put the fighter into anymore stress. Under these conditions getting a brand new very costly french topsights isn't necessary.

This is the Sh-3UM, which is a HMS, not a HMDS like Topsight.
The difference is in HMS there is no display. You see the enemy aircraft by the ring which you see in the second pic below. After that you get a lockon tone in your helmet and a "Launch Authorized"(Russians display "Fire" in the HUD and "Launch Authorised" in the voice command. Dunno if the IAF has changed that.). In the HMDS you can get all the targeting info which is normally displayed in the HUD, since basically HMDS is just HMS + HUD tech integrated into the helmet itself.

Only the Navy MiG-29Ks are getting Topsight since they are brand new.