What's new

MiG-29K planes face operation deficiencies: CAG

if the mig 29 and the 29k share the same engine and core components then dont this help improve reduce aog. yes i know the naval rd-33 have more power but that does not change anything.
No Mig-29K uses RD-33MK which has 10-15% more Thrust The RD-33MK "Morskaya Osa" (Russian: Морская Оса: "Sea Wasp") is the latest model developed in 2001. It is intended to power the MiG-29K and MiG-29KUB shipborne fighters, however it has also been adopted for the MiG-35. The RD-33MK develops 7% higher thrust, is digitally controlled FADEC and smokeless unlike earlier RD-33 engines, has increased afterburner thrust to 9,000 kilograms-force (88,000 N; 20,000 lbf) and dry weight 1,145 kilograms (2,524 lb) compared to the baseline model through modern materials used on the cooled blades, although it retains the same length and maximum diameter. Incorporated is an infrared and optical signature visibility reduction systems. Service life has been increased to 4,000 hours. The RD-33MK ensures shipborne fighters unassisted take-off capability, retain performance in hot climate environment and, naturally, a boost in combat efficiency for MiG-29 fighter latest variant
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klimov_RD-33

Mig -29K Faced issues before ,On 23 June 2011, a MiG-29KUB crashed during testing in Russia, prior to delivery to India, killing its two pilots

http://www.vesti.ru/doc.html?id=486618\
http://archive.indianexpress.com/news/fighter-meant-for-indian-navy-crashes-in-russia/808413/
 
.
Blocked asses to Actual Cost assessment

May I suggest that you correct this typo before the moderation blocks your own?
Assess or alternatively access should prove adequate.

Also, if your thoughts are striking, the constant bolding is redundant, overkill if you will?
And if they aren't, it really can't help, can it?

Just sayin', Tay.

Rafale-M naval variant costs 110 million = 3 times that of Mig 29K

No it doesn't! https://defence.pk/threads/real-jet-fighter-prices-rafale-f-35-2015-16.423797/
A Rafale M was 78M€ or 85-86M$ last year.

And a great day all, Tay.
 
. .
No it doesn't! https://defence.pk/threads/real-jet-fighter-prices-rafale-f-35-2015-16.423797/
A Rafale M was 78M€ or 85-86M$ last year.

And a great day all, Tay.

etc4.png
 
.
. .
No no, Blue :
A Rafale M was 78M€ or 85-86M$ last year.
Check currency exchange rates for 79M€ as we speak for fun.

And yes, the operational costs past induction are separate.
But it includes the AESA that others don't for example. :rolleyes1:

I'm just miffed that people don't read links especially the ones
from the PDF forum itself for a start. I translated the thing and
gave the link to it in that OP which our friend apparently skipped.

If you don't go through an answer, out of where comes a rebuttal?
Not listening is quite impolite in a conversation and all that ...

Have a good day, Tay.
 
Last edited:
.
Rafale-M naval variant costs 110 million = 3 times that of Mig 29K

So of course price matters.

Sony TV is always expensive than Videocon.
A desi katta is 5 times cheaper than Beretta 92
 
.
The RD-33MK develops 7% higher thrust, is digitally controlled FADEC and smokeless unlike earlier RD-33 engines
Hell yea,That it does.. We often were mocked around by the Yanks showing off their Pratt & W'hitney's mounted over F-18s while we pull our stick and a black stream of smoke comes around which itself is evident for the American flying his F18 that I'm kicking in my after burner for some steam.. Damn, Russkies..
 
.
MIG-29 DEAL INVOLVED AVOIDABLE EXPENDITURE OF AROUND RS 10 CRORE: CAG


NEW DELHI:
The Comptroller and Auditor General (CAG) on Tuesday rapped the government over the deal for buying MiG-29 aircraft for the Navy stating that it cost an "avoidable expenditure" of Rs 9.97 crore.
The Defence Ministry concluded a contract on March 8, 2010 and the CAG report tabled in parliament on Tuesday said the contract was finalised by "providing price escalation to the firm although an option clause was valid till 27 March 2010 under an earlier contract".
This, the report said, resulted in an avoidable expenditure of Rs 9.97 crore. The report called the aircraft as being "riddled with problems" and it was accepted despite having technical discrepancies.
"The MiG-29K/KUB which is a carrier borne multi role aircraft and the mainstay of integral fleet air defence, is riddled with problems relating to airframe, RD MK-33 engine and fly-by-wire 4 system. Aircraft were being technically accepted despite having discrepancies/anomalies," the report said.
It also said that the serviceability of MiG-29K was low, ranging from 15.93 per cent to 37.63 per cent and that of MiG-29KUB ranging from 21.30 per cent to 47.14 per cent.
"The augmentation of infrastructure at Visakhapatnam is still at the Detailed Project Report stage even six years after approval (December 2009). The Full Mission Simulator was assessed to be unsuitable for Carrier Qualification (CQ) simulator training for pilots, as the visuals did not support the profile. The service life of the aircraft is 6,000 hours or 25 years (whichever is earlier) and with issues facing the MiG-29K/KUB, the operational life of the aircraft already delivered would be reduced," it said.
Further, the deliveries of the aircraft, which will be placed on a aircraft carrier, scheduled between 2012 and 2016 are much ahead of the delivery schedule of the Indigenous Aircraft Carrier in 2023, as projected by Cochin Shipyard Limited, the CAG pointed.
"The Ministry failed to negotiate/quantify sub-contracting work and its cost with reference to the Phase-I contract thereby leading to undue advantage to the shipyard. There was incorrect estimation of man-hour per ton to be utilised for fabrication and outfitting in the Phase-I contract which led to undue benefit to the shipyard to the tune of Rs 476.15 crore. Large unspent balances in the project account and unilateral withdrawal of funds by the shipyard were indicators of weak financial management," the report added.

http://www.indiandefensenews.in/2016/07/mig-29-deal-involved-avoidable.html
 
.
lol free press and accountability is necessary for the above to happen

Ahh, yes, the usual scapegoat of censorship whenever one finds a disparity between what he hears and what he wishes to hear. :disagree:
 
.
Ahh, yes, the usual scapegoat of censorship whenever one finds a disparity between what he hears and what he wishes to hear. :disagree:
No dude.. I mean, when there is no delays, No cost over runs, No other issues of a product supplied by the same country to two different nations, we all tend to think, whether the nation possess any super human efforts or is it just that, nation hides its drawbacks, just to make sure that its enemies are scared..which one is true in your case??
 
.
No dude.. I mean, when there is no delays, No cost over runs, No other issues of a product supplied by the same country to two different nations, we all tend to think, whether the nation possess any super human efforts or is it just that, nation hides its drawbacks, just to make sure that its enemies are scared..which one is true in your case??

Except that, in this case, China and India are not the only countries operating Russian-built aircraft. I would be more willing to buy into a faulty-product theory had other countries undergone the same troubles with their stock.

Hence, drawing from the constant dialogue pertaining to issues with Russian-bought equipment and the relative lack of similar rhetoric from other countries, the issue most likely lies with the end user, the product that was specifically slated for that user (unlikely occurrence), or with the press that blows mishaps out of proportion.

Moreover, we get plenty of news regarding aviation mishaps, freelance or otherwise, from the countries.
 
. .
Open the link and check the lower paragraph, TMA.
You can google translate it to confirm my own version
that, being done by hand ( and mind ), is more precise.

A link given in the thread I offered in the previous post.

The wiki only gave a wrong exchange rate for € to $ or
at least one from a rare period making the price 25+M$
too high? Try it today for 78/79M€.

Have a great day, Tay.
 
Last edited:
.
Back
Top Bottom