Mig-29 K/kub Fighters For India, First pictures - Page 2

Archer · 02-08-2007, 00:32 AM

TP Huang,

All specs for the Zhuk MFE/ MSFE are speculative, as neither radar has been actually fully developed. Pick up Phaza literature from a different year, and you'll have different claims. Latest figures for the MFE are similar to the ME, in fact range is marginally lower, but they claim higher number of tracked/ engaged figures (30/8). As you'd know, they have been claiming 20 TWS, 4 engaged for the Zhuk ME, but apparently, the real figures achieved till date have been 10/4.

highsea · 02-08-2007, 01:30 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

The Russians claim that the 29K has a new smokeless engine etc. As to whether they succeeded..

I refer to Vishnu Som of Ndtv who flew in the MiG29UB and had a chance to compare the 29 Kub (two seater 29K which we're discussing) to the UB (two seater 29..)...

Quote:

Would any jet be smoke free in -12 degree temperatures?

One would hope so, since the average temp at 30,000 ft. is about 40 below. If he's blaming the smoke on low temps at -12, what's it going to look like at -40 or -60?

Edit to add: just looked this up in my standard atmosphere chart. It gives the temp at 37,000 ft. as -69.7 F (-56.5 C) on a standard day.

Archer · 02-08-2007, 02:08 AM

I think he mixed up contrails with smoke..

Tronic · 02-08-2007, 16:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

I think he mixed up contrails with smoke..

Yea, and also, he probably did not take the outer temperature whilst flying... -12 degrees, most likely ground temperature...

highsea · 02-08-2007, 17:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

I think he mixed up contrails with smoke..

I don't know who this person is, but it's a pretty stupid mistake to make (for someone who writes a review of the plane, and is important or connected enough to get an incentive ride). Even if he doesn't know the difference between smoke and contrails, you would think someone would vet the article for blatant errors (if it actually is just an error as you are suggesting).

This comment is on the ACIG MiG-29 page from last years Aero India (Chapter 15, Fulcrum Shift):

Quote:

...The M2 makes a very short take off and banks right. Like the MiG-29K, the M2 is offered with the Phazotron Zhuk-ME radar while the NIIP Bars-29 is still under development. The new engines are notably, less smoky than the conventional RD-33 but not by a great margin.

Archer · 02-08-2007, 22:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highsea

I don't know who this person is, but it's a pretty stupid mistake to make (for someone who writes a review of the plane, and is important or connected enough to get an incentive ride). Even if he doesn't know the difference between smoke and contrails, you would think someone would vet the article for blatant errors (if it actually is just an error as you are suggesting).

He's not a pilot, just a pretty down to earth journo who writes for Latest News from India - NDTV.com . Nice guy, and shares whatever he comes across.

It wasnt an article btw, just a post on this thread

Bharat Rakshak Forum :: View topic - Life after two tail slides in a MiG 29 UB **Photos Added!**

I am just guessing he meant contrails or he made an assumption that any engine would have a "trail" in cold weather..I mean its the kind of the first thing you jump to, (y'know when you breath out in cold weather, condensation & the works..) and just applied it here..

Besides he's just asking a question, not making a definitive statement if you see the context

Quote:

George thats a temporary thing ... the jet is so new that they are not even flying it to Aero India. There is a long way to go before it is a fully integrated platform. Oh ... one more point ... the smokeless engines ... are markedly better than older MiGs ... If you see my footage on the story on Sunday ... I will use a shot of the KUB and the older UB as its chase plane. However, the KUB engines DO NOT appear to be completely smoke-free. Would any jet be smoke free in -12 degree temperatures?

BTW, he's got a ride on the IAFs Mirage 2000 H's, the SHars, in the F/A-18 E/F, the MiG-29 UB, and apparently- the MiG-35 and F-16 in the current airshow as well.

Well talk about a dream job!

No airs though, and doesnt claim to be any guru on tech. issues..

Quote:

This comment is on the ACIG MiG-29 page from last years Aero India (Chapter 15, Fulcrum Shift):

By Harry, right?

In the thread above, Vishnu who had a chance to see both types, states..

Quote:

SaiK ... I didnt fly the KUB ... I flew the UB which smokes black big time. The KUB ... in comparison smokes very little.

So I guess the RD-33 MKs are quite improved over the originals..

highsea · 02-08-2007, 23:56 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

...By Harry, right?

I don't know. The page doesn't give credits, but most likely.

The AC under comment was the MiG-29M2 powered by the new engine. As I understand it, what was called the RD-33K is the basis for all the new versions. The MK is upthrusted for carrier ops, and the OVT has the TVC nozzle. They all feature the new combustion chamber.

They used to call the MK the -10M, and the M was the -3M. Who can keep track of the Russian numbers anyway, they change every 6 months...

Dreadnought · 02-09-2007, 14:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highsea

I don't know. The page doesn't give credits, but most likely.

The AC under comment was the MiG-29M2 powered by the new engine. As I understand it, what was called the RD-33K is the basis for all the new versions. The MK is upthrusted for carrier ops, and the OVT has the TVC nozzle. They all feature the new combustion chamber.

They used to call the MK the -10M, and the M was the -3M. Who can keep track of the Russian numbers anyway, they change every 6 months...

High rate of failure?

Archer · 02-09-2007, 17:02 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by highsea

I don't know. The page doesn't give credits, but most likely.

The AC under comment was the MiG-29M2 powered by the new engine. As I understand it, what was called the RD-33K is the basis for all the new versions. The MK is upthrusted for carrier ops, and the OVT has the TVC nozzle. They all feature the new combustion chamber.

They used to call the MK the -10M, and the M was the -3M. Who can keep track of the Russian numbers anyway, they change every 6 months...

IIRC they have been tinkering with the engine for quite somewhile now..several folks who went to MAKs also commented on the (relatively) smoke free new MiGs...so it does appear to be a problem which they've licked..for the most part.

I am more leery of Klimovs reliability and MTBF figures though...I'll only believe them after the engine is in service for a while.

Designations, LOL!

AchtungSpitFire · 02-11-2007, 04:36 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

The K-36's are regarded as amongst the best ejection systems worldwide..& the MiG-29 Fleet (in the IAF) has had a very reasonable attrition rate.

Coming to the deeper question of carrier aviation, its undoubtedly much riskier, but then again, the SHars were far trickier birds to fly.

I was just trying to bait one of fanboys here. I wish the best for the IN in their implementation of the -K into our service fleet. I wish the IN would commission an expeditionary fleet to sail around the world, especially the western hemisphere. I'd imagine IN sailors would love some port calls in NA, the carribean and SA.

s_qwert63 · 02-11-2007, 05:25 AM

Damn, India seems to be gobbling up so much new equipment from Russia.
I am afraid soon we'll be disbanding our divisions and selling the equipment off to India

highsea · 02-11-2007, 07:32 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AchtungSpitFire

I was just trying to bait one of fanboys here.

I just want to go in record that I am apalled by this behavior....

Archer · 02-13-2007, 11:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

Wouldnt be complete without specs, would it?

Phaza says 120-160 Km, for a five square meter target & Mig-21 (3 Sq Mtr) at 120 Km. Andrei Fomins interview of Anatoly Kanashchenkov.

The Zhuk ME is definitely more powerful than the APG-68 V(9) if we go by published figures.

Begad, my detective work was correct!

And Phaza (for once) has honestly released current specs about radar as compared to "future aims", note 10 target TWS, from the 20 advertised but a couple of years back!

Zhuk ME
specs_zhuk_me.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

TP Huang,

The lates bit of paper on the Zhuk-MFE .

specs_zhuk_mfe.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Take it with a nice pinch of duly iodized salt!

GGTharos · 02-13-2007, 18:42 PM

The MFE antenna looks like its a little bigger than what's normally fitted in a MiG.
The ME is more along what has been seen previously, IIRC. It's all reasonable range increase from the MiG-29C's, IIRC, where the radar range had been slightly increased to 90km.

tphuang · 02-14-2007, 01:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Archer

Begad, my detective work was correct!

And Phaza (for once) has honestly released current specs about radar as compared to "future aims", note 10 target TWS, from the 20 advertised but a couple of years back!

Zhuk ME
specs_zhuk_me.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

TP Huang,

The lates bit of paper on the Zhuk-MFE .

specs_zhuk_mfe.jpg - Image - Photobucket - Video and Image Hosting

Take it with a nice pinch of duly iodized salt!

super, I was looking for a zhuk-mfe brochure. Although, with the development of Zhuk-MAE, not sure if MFE will ever be put in service anywhere.

I actually got a brochure of Zhuk-ME too.
http://img455.imageshack.us/img455/2257/zhukmeav9.jpg

02-08-2007, 00:32 AM	#16 (permalink)
Archer *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 10-13-03 Posts: 2,888	TP Huang, All specs for the Zhuk MFE/ MSFE are speculative, as neither radar has been actually fully developed. Pick up Phaza literature from a different year, and you'll have different claims. Latest figures for the MFE are similar to the ME, in fact range is marginally lower, but they claim higher number of tracked/ engaged figures (30/8). As you'd know, they have been claiming 20 TWS, 4 engaged for the Zhuk ME, but apparently, the real figures achieved till date have been 10/4. __________________ Karmani Vyapurutham Dhanuhu My bow is stretched for its task

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
Most needed in US NAVY	Praxus	Naval Forces	345	05-17-2008 20:36 PM
LCA beats F-16	Mr_Vastu	Military Aviation	136	08-08-2007 03:57 AM
Favorite Naval Book(s)	RAL's_pal?	Naval Forces	62	02-09-2007 04:46 AM
MiG-29 “FALCON HUNTER” Exclusive : THE WINNER	Mr_Vaastu	Military Aviation	152	05-20-2005 00:36 AM

02-08-2007, 02:08 AM	#18 (permalink)
Archer *Senior Contributor* Join Date: 10-13-03 Posts: 2,888	I think he mixed up contrails with smoke..

02-11-2007, 05:25 AM	#26 (permalink)
s_qwert63 Contributor Join Date: 08-29-03 Location: everywhere Posts: 744 Country:	Damn, India seems to be gobbling up so much new equipment from Russia. I am afraid soon we'll be disbanding our divisions and selling the equipment off to India

02-13-2007, 18:42 PM	#29 (permalink)
GGTharos Contributor Join Date: 10-06-06 Posts: 357	The MFE antenna looks like its a little bigger than what's normally fitted in a MiG. The ME is more along what has been seen previously, IIRC. It's all reasonable range increase from the MiG-29C's, IIRC, where the radar range had been slightly increased to 90km.

Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)