I wanted to ask people about a Tier 9 fighter. Having 60 countermeasures is nothing; I wanted to check on the MiG-29M—it’s already been confirmed that it has 120 countermeasures on its upper and lower surfaces. Here’s the report:
This MiG-29 KR and the MiG-35 should have at least 120 countermeasures like this one, since they are upgraded versions and use the same countermeasure pylons; having 60 countermeasures in the 9-range category simply isn’t enough.
If you have any evidence or want to file a report, please post everything here. Thank you.
And I found some design errors in the 3D model of the MiG-35,
The red square on the fuselage is indeed the exact location of the countermeasure dispensers (flares/chaff) on advanced variants such as the MiG-29M/OVT and the MiG-35.
Hi, it appears you are confusing the 9-15 and 9-41 airframes they are not the same and feature structural and material differences.
the MiG-29M 9-15 was a 80s prototype planned to use 120x CMs mounted inside its spine
the MiG-35 and MiG-29KR are a member of the 9-41 style of airframes made in the 2000s/2010s and use a completely different style of CMs with 2 x 16 or 32 piece cassettes mounted next to the engines.
There was the MiG-35D 9-15D which was built by converting one of the MiG-29M 9-15 airframes by giving it the MiG-35 avionics and other stuff. but its still part a 9-15 airframe at the end of the day and its not applicable to the MiG-35 we have in game which is part of the 9-41 family
"Even if the factory designation or internal frame classification differs (moving from 9-15 to the 9-41 standard), the physical layout of the aircraft’s upper fuselage tells a different story. High-resolution photographic evidence of actual production MiG-35s clearly shows the exact same dorsal spine cassette housing panels in that exact spot.
If the physical exterior retains the structural fairings and access plates for the dorsal BVP countermeasure cassettes, the internal volume exists to house them. It makes zero gameplay or realistic sense for a modern, advanced multirole fighter at high battle ratings to be artificially restricted to fewer countermeasures than an older 80s prototype, especially when the structural hardpoints for the dorsal dispensers are visibly present on the airframe.
Actually the layout tells this exact story. 9.41 airframes have very different spine layout, including an additional fuel tank, APU and MAW sensors if we talk about MiG-29M and MiG-35 airframes. Place that you are lookigng at houses an APU underneath and this is the exhaust cover. On a MiG-29K it is slightly different in design and looks like it’s currently in-game, gaijin was just too lazy to change that.
It is still utilizing the exact same cassettes, which means it would receive the same amount. Just because it visually changed does not mean they would decrease it on a model that would seriously need it, the top of their line aircraft. One of their last and you are saying it would have less countermeasures its predecessors?
That’s your point…you cannot ‘count’ empty housing bays fitted with flush structural blanking plates on clean, airshow display models. Active military aircraft are built with internal structural volume for standardized payloads.
The primary technical literature (David Baker, Yefim Gordon, Andy Gröning) explicitly states the interior layout of this structural dorsal spine family accommodates two separate BVP countermeasure cassettes for a total of 120 standard-caliber rounds. Forcing a top-tier multirole aircraft with extensive ECM/EW suites to run on a copied 1980s tail-pod mold from a 9-12/13 is a clear asset-modeling omission, not historical accuracy.
You know what’s another country that does this exact thing especially with how modified vehicles are within service and airshows. The United States of America. I am someone who enjoys both nations aircraft and ground vehicles. MIG-35s utilize the exact same cassettes as the 9-15s and have the same housing.
Also to note, the GTDE-117 auxiliary power unit / starter turbine on MiG-29M2/MiG-35 platforms vents its exhaust gas downward and outward through a localized port near the lower engine nacelle area not straight up into the center of the upper dorsal spine. I’m sure you and others who disagree could figure out fairly easily what overheating problems would occur in the general area of the aircraft.
this is even the exact bort number as the mig35 in game
it only gets the double row launchers from export MiG-29M due to the plague on this game known as “technical compatibility”
it gets double row launchers because of the power creep missilie spam 16v16 meta. If lobbies were smaller and brackets less compressed - 32 countermeasures would be… workable. At current state even 48 CMs on J-15T is abhorrent
It’s different for MiG-35/29K. It is not interchangeable cassetes, it’s completely interchangeable launchers. BVP-32-50 was never purchased by Russian MoD, only BVP-16-50 were.
You may not have realized, but you proved those in defense of MiG-35S point. On an active MiG-35, the legacy 1980s upward-firing tail blocks are completely gone and the surface is smooth. The modern platform loads through the top dorsal access hatches, but moves internally to fire downward from the lower nacelle slots shown in your photo. Not to mention, it wasn’t only an aerodynamic fix, it was done to also allow for two full BVP-60-26 cassettes. You just provided the exact visual proof that the in-game mig-35 is a lazy copy-paste model with slightly downgraded capabilities.
