Comments on: Mig-35 video - first official presentation

By: Marko

Marko — Thu, 06 Aug 2009 19:01:33 +0000

Its stealth capability…Sry but no. Things that russians have for detecting stealth are not radars, so don’t speak if u don’t know. It is alot more complicated on how do they detect stealth.
USA rockets are much worse then russian ones so “hence” the MIG 35!!! with its super-manuverbility would evade it with a basic evade manuver. People here think that if u shoot a rocket … u won, sry but no.
WVR russian fighter would prevail due to its HMD with AA-11? just that? sry but no. Its corner velocity and great manuverbility makes him dominate in a dogfight no matter the HMD or a missile used.
Sad that people think that stealth means what it doesn’t.
I don’t say that F-22 is bad. It is a great plane, gj to USA but saying like he would beat out the crap of mig 35…so childsh.

By: aztec

aztec — Tue, 19 May 2009 00:01:20 +0000

Exelente avion, seguramente sin igual en el mundo, ya que, si el mig-29 es espectacular; este hace temblar a los estadounidenses!
FOR ACE: JAJAJA, F-14, 15 AND 16 ARE HISTORY MY FRIEND AND IQUAL YOUR CONTRY!

By: PolisCy :)

PolisCy :) — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 01:32:25 +0000

F-22 Vs MiG-35, the F-22 would dominate for sure due to its stealth capability . . Because of its very small RCS the american fighter would have the first shot with AIM-120s hence most chances of winning . . BUT in a WVR fight chances are the russian fighter would prevail due to its HMD with AA-11 archer missiles . . It wouldn be easy though because both fighters are very maneuverable and with TVC . . But whats the point if the russian fighter cant even get close to the american fighter

By: Bree

Bree — Wed, 11 Mar 2009 13:08:17 +0000

I think the MiG-35 is a beautiful piece of technology, but so is the F-22 Raptor. If it came down to fight it really depends on who is flying the thing.

By: freddan

freddan — Thu, 17 Apr 2008 22:40:36 +0000

The F-16 dominating any plane? Let alone a plane with a state of the art radar? The F-16 was ruled out as a serious contender when Sweden was shopping around for a new figher because it’s radar was far from sufficient in capability, I doubt the radars fitted to F-16s today would be good enough…
The F-14 has much more room for radar within the forward fuselage and the diameter of the nose is larger so naturaly it can be fitted with a much better radar than could be fitted in a Mig-29 airframe at the same tech-level, it goes for all airframes… Being a larger aircraft, the F-22 will allways be able to lug around a more capable radar than the F-35.

It’s a real eye opener to read “Introduction to airborne radar” by Gearge W. Stimson. He explaines alot about AESA radars and what benefits you get with them… It’s well worth reading before you start telling people what aircraft would win…

One thing most people here forget is what threats the respective aircraft were built to handle. Perhaps the Mig-25 wasn’t suppoused to fight F-18’s but rather fight F-4’s. It’s kind of like it is with political economics (driving forward but seeing only what’s in the rearview-mirror) You’ll never know if you succeded or failed until it’s too late to fix it. What kind of threat could emerge that renders the F-22 useless (besides “assymetric warfare”)??????
Establishing performace parameters for a new fighter is one thing, but you have to establish economic parameters as well before you figure out how to do it and if you want to go at it alone. Somewhere in those calculations you should have at least an idea of how many planes you need to buy to get the desired combined combat effect and singular combat effect.
The USA has chosen to buy the F-22 but it doesn’t seem like anyone cares if they get a hundred or a thousand of them as long as they get F-22’s instead of F-15’s.

I saw someone commenting on the staggering scores of WWII german aces, something about a targetrich environment and poorly trained opponents etc;
The luftwaffe had no rotation like the RAF so many pilots got alot of kills during the battle of Britain for instance… I don’t know if the Luftwaffe changed that policy. Marseille fought in north Africa againts british, commonwelth and americans equipped with Hurricanes, Spitfires, P-40’s and other types used there.

Finally, internet is not a reliable source of information! You can write what ever you want, it does not have to be true, it could be a flat out lie since the “publisher” is not lialbe like they would be if they printed it! There is no need for factchecking if it’s going to be on someone elses server(New York Times would of course be liable for what they publish on their server if it could be taken as facts as opposed to oppinions) I have read at least two different quotes on what the F-14D’s top speed is and the USN adds to the confution by having a third listed on their website… there’s internet litterature for you.

By: PROAUDIO

PROAUDIO — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 21:38:53 +0000

well sometimes, i got tired reading all this blabling… that the US fihgters are far away better tah those russians, or viceversa… well the fact is tjat since corean war, no russian and american fighter had a serius math in equal terms of technology, since f-86 vs mig-15 where the hability of the pilot made the diference, but recent encounter are really unequal… like those Navy F-14 vs sirian SU-22, obviusly F-14 where superior thanks to the better avionics an avanced weapon controls… but how can explain that an iraqui mig-25 shotdown an F-18 in the gulf war? been the last one much more modern fighter? and what to say about those maneuver in 2003-04 between Indians SU-30MKI and USAF F-15C? where the Indians pilots got an achievemet of 3:1 over those USAF fighters? so about what air superiority arw qe talking about?

By: Chris V

Chris V — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 19:19:43 +0000

I meant to say an upgrade from the Mig-29. oops…

By: Chris V

Chris V — Sun, 09 Mar 2008 19:17:42 +0000

Anyone who thinks that an F-14 is a suitable match to the Mig-35 is a retard. As for the -15 and -16 in the hands of the right pilot they could compete with the MIg but with a well trained pilot the Mig would win. The difference that seems to be forgotten is that the Mig-35 is an upgrade of the -27. Glass cockpit, avionics, etc. The F-22 is an all new design built from the ground up. It is in service now. The follow up Mig and Sukoi next gen planes are still in the development stage. They will be formidable aircraft no doubt but they are not in service. And for the knuckle head who thinks that a Mig 25 would have helped win a war for Argentina you are very confused. The fact that the Foxbat was fast enough to run away from real dogfighters points this out. In your scenario would the Migs have joined the battle and then run away and claimed victory? A better air force at that time would have been nice, but there are 20 other types from all over the world that would been better than the -25.

By: John Seale

John Seale — Sun, 24 Feb 2008 18:36:09 +0000

Innovative…probably the most advanced aircraft out there with the USA spending all its money elsewhere.

By: stax-serbia

stax-serbia — Sat, 22 Sep 2007 11:24:09 +0000

great!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!