to fire behind the corner
Does the RPM change anything?
not as far as iam aware
It’s an official MiG presentation , author of the video filming the event has just transcribed data presented by MiG presumably on brochure.
Please read carefully my previous comment. As i previously explained the 1000+ T/R variant is called FGA-35 not FGA-29. This is not an opinion , it’s a fact stated by KRET ( parent company to Phazotron ).
Does anyone have any details on OLS-K and if it would be any better than T220 in terms of angles etc
1 Like
So, MiG gave outrageously wrong information then? Or author simply didn’t know what he’s writing about? My money is on second
This is not “stated by KRET” it is written on a brochure, there isn’t even a proof that it was translated correctly
Which part was outrageously wrong information ?
There is no brochure involved here, the article comes from KRETs official Information and Analysis Magazine edition #2/2015 ( i have already posted the preface ) and is written by YURI GUSKOV, First Deputy Director General / Designer General, Phazotron-NIIR.
So either Deputy Director General of Phazotron doesn’t know what he is talking about or you don’t …
I told you already, MiG-35 can’t carry 4 R-27ERs, nor can it carry R-60Ms
Or someone mistranslated. I saw plenty of wrong translations in my life to not trust every single word that I see on paper
If I’m not mistaken OLS-K is literally OLS-UE put in a container
According to which document ? MiG themselves state that the aircraft has open enough architecture to the point it can receive foreign weapons so there is no reason whatsoever to explain why it could not mount multiple R-27 or R-60M.
Pretty hard to botch the translation between FGA-29 and FGA-35, especially when the author clearly mentions FGA-29 being the early model and FGA-35 being a variant of that model with increased T/R count.
by using a standartised databus
(mig29smt as an example bc it lists the standart)
https://web.archive.org/web/20040812200303fw_/http://www.roe.ru/products/af/mig29smt.htm
which iam pretty sure the r-60 isnt compatible with
same for the r-27
SMT/R with training R-60
and that is supposed to prove that the r-60 is compatible with MIL-STD-1553B?
But its not official info. Someone just added this info later
Pretty easy actually to just slap those designations because they sound cool. All the official interviews state that FGA-29 installed in 154 was with reduced amount of TRMs and would get back its planned amount after the tests. Nothing on some mythical FGA-35 with same design as FGA-29.
According to physical capabilities. R-27ER can be only placed on the innermost pylon of the aircraft, so it is limited by 2.
Your proof for it being able to carry more than x2 R-27s is that it can use non-Russian weaponry?
But that isn’t proof of it being able to carry more than x2 R-27s.
A simple reason that the MiG-35 can’t carry more than x2 ERs is Wing Loading. ERs weigh A LOT more than R-77-1, and thus will induce more wear on the airframe overtime.
Along with that, the MiG-35S we have in game is a 9.41SR, which hasn’t been advertised with R-27s (Though, the MiG-35 is compatable with all of the weaponry of the 9.41 MiG-29M, which does include the ER, but has only ever carried 2 of them. ;) )
Also, interestingly enough, neither the MiG-35S or MiG-29M have been advertised with R-60s.
If you want to prove that the MiG-35 can carry more than x2 R-27s, you would actually have to prove it. It simply having a universal databus is not proof enough. Otherwise we could simply say that EVERY pylon on the MiG-35 could theoretically carry 27ERs.
APU-60 is visibly mounted and R-60 is visibly used for training … You tell me , what is the proof that R-60 isn’t compatible with MVK-SUV ?
and now you show me an APU-60 mounted to any new gen Fulcrum
you are conflating being able to integrade forgein weapons through using a standart databus with being able to use old soviet missiles
You are shifting the goal post. Not being done ≠ not being able to be done.
I’m not conflating anything , you made the following argument :
I showed you an SMT mounting R-60 for training , so im a waiting for the document stating R-60 isn’t compatible with MVK-SUV because it’s compliant with MIL-STD-1553B standard .
Or is that not the argument you made ?