Yes, I meant the MiG-29K. Thanks.
RMAF Future; need opinions
- Thread starter Ding
- Start date
Sorry, please explain a little bit more :
I think I remember that the price Malaysia paid for the Fulcrums at the time was very very cheap.
Was the Maintenance deal signed at the same time and a part of the whole set-up ?
Or are those local maintenance partners that now overcharge so much just an example of the political corruption in Malaysia?
Btw...conflagration...isn't that what Nero did to Rome ?
I think I remember that the price Malaysia paid for the Fulcrums at the time was very very cheap.
Was the Maintenance deal signed at the same time and a part of the whole set-up ?
Or are those local maintenance partners that now overcharge so much just an example of the political corruption in Malaysia?
Btw...conflagration...isn't that what Nero did to Rome ?
You sound like a ringer for Mahathair.
As Sturm has mentioned, Mahathair does not quite get the idea of source codes. Source codes =/= weapon codes.
@ B3LA
Feanor made a typo. I think he meant configuring or confusing.
Ananda
The Bunker Group
Tavarisch, so sorry, but I think you're a little bit unfair to your air force. Relatively all the air force in this region basically can't afford to maintain large number of aircraft types. Simplification and standardization on aircraft types hopefully should be the trend.
If Malaysian AF decided to only have SU 30 & F 18 as their fighters, then why bother to maintain Mig 29 ? In fact in my oppinion they also should get rid of Hawk also, since you guys already choose the Italians way for trainers anyway.
The arguments for light fighters on Hawk issues seems will be irrelevant if the MAF already decided to standardize with Flankers & Hornets.
I was kinda sad too when the decision was made, but have come to accept that the RMAF cant be maintaining too many different types. The deal now seems to be at replacing the MiG's for 6 additional MKM's which seems good to me. Plus eventually I think even the Hornets's should be retired as they too are aging and too limited in quantity. Their roles can be perfomred by the MKM's anyways. The MAF should look at a future MRCA that is light and can replace the roles of the MiG's/Hornets and complement the MKM's in a network centric warfare.
ON the MiG's i think it was foolish political decisions that killed it. No proper maintenance or support was created for the plane when they pruchased it, and they allowed the mutiple local vendors to supply parts, which is shocking, as the only means of these silly companies to survive is by inflating their services rendered, while not contributing in the least to the nations defence. I think this is no longer true with the MKM's situation which should rightly be so.
I also think Russia today is a more reliable defence supplier and they have cleaned up their act , with proper support contracts for their new line of flankers and MiG's. Plus their newer planes have longer TBO compared to the soviet era built hardware. While the MiG 29K/MiG 35's would not share the same weakness of the MiG 29's i do not think they are suitable for our MRCA needs now. We should look at a western platform that can complement the MKM's.
ON the MiG's i think it was foolish political decisions that killed it. No proper maintenance or support was created for the plane when they pruchased it, and they allowed the mutiple local vendors to supply parts, which is shocking, as the only means of these silly companies to survive is by inflating their services rendered, while not contributing in the least to the nations defence. I think this is no longer true with the MKM's situation which should rightly be so.
I also think Russia today is a more reliable defence supplier and they have cleaned up their act , with proper support contracts for their new line of flankers and MiG's. Plus their newer planes have longer TBO compared to the soviet era built hardware. While the MiG 29K/MiG 35's would not share the same weakness of the MiG 29's i do not think they are suitable for our MRCA needs now. We should look at a western platform that can complement the MKM's.
Are you sure on this? Does the RD-33MK engine and Zhuk-ME radar have a much higher time between overhaul than the RD-33 and NO19M Topaz ? In terms of mantainance hours,
how does the RD-33MK compare to the GE F404-GE402? There were some figures about this on an Indian blog, I'll try to look it up. Don't get me wrong here, I'm not anti-Russian or against Russian products. I firmly believe that for an air arm like the RMAF, which has traditionaly operated Western gear, a new operating/mantainance philosophy and procedures have to adopted to operate russian gear. Then again, this is just my opinion, I'm far from being any kind of expert.
Ergonomically, while I'm assuming that the glass cockpit of the MiG-29K is a big improvement over the MiG-29N, how it does compare to the cockpits on the Super Hornet or Gripen?
Last edited:
I thought that the Malaysian phase-out was announced months ago. The bottom line is that the maintenance cost of the MiG-29 is just too high - particularly compared to such alternatives as the Su-30.
Malaysia to phase out troublesome MiG-29 fighters
Malaysia to consider fighter options once economy recovers
The MiG-29 has earned a reputation for a while as being a shop queen. It can be argued as to whether things might have been better if the Soviet Union hadn't collapsed (and the flow of spare parts had been more consistent), but the Su-27/30 has earned a solid reputation as being the more reliable of the two.
As some of us are aware, Algeria recently rejected a shipment of MiG-29s as not meeting its air force's quality requirements, and insisted that the agreement be renegotiated in favor the the Su-30:
Algeria returns 'faulty' MiG-29s
Russia to purchase Algeria's unwanted MiG-29s
Even the Russian air force has been having problems with the MiG-29 model, with roughly a third of their fleet grounded due to corrosion problems in the vertical tail:
Corrosion issue grounds one-third of Russian air force MiG-29 fleet
The bottom line is that, when it flies, the MiG-29 can be a formidable opponent. It's maintenance history, however, has been suspect in a number of settings, flying in a number of different air forces. The RD-33 engine on the MiG-29, for example, has half of the usable service life of the AL-31F used on the Su-27 (500 hours as opposed to 1000 hours). That a relatively small air force, such as that of Malaysia, should want to focus its resources on its more reliable assets should not come as a surprise.
Malaysia to phase out troublesome MiG-29 fighters
Malaysia to consider fighter options once economy recovers
The MiG-29 has earned a reputation for a while as being a shop queen. It can be argued as to whether things might have been better if the Soviet Union hadn't collapsed (and the flow of spare parts had been more consistent), but the Su-27/30 has earned a solid reputation as being the more reliable of the two.
As some of us are aware, Algeria recently rejected a shipment of MiG-29s as not meeting its air force's quality requirements, and insisted that the agreement be renegotiated in favor the the Su-30:
Algeria returns 'faulty' MiG-29s
Russia to purchase Algeria's unwanted MiG-29s
Even the Russian air force has been having problems with the MiG-29 model, with roughly a third of their fleet grounded due to corrosion problems in the vertical tail:
Corrosion issue grounds one-third of Russian air force MiG-29 fleet
The bottom line is that, when it flies, the MiG-29 can be a formidable opponent. It's maintenance history, however, has been suspect in a number of settings, flying in a number of different air forces. The RD-33 engine on the MiG-29, for example, has half of the usable service life of the AL-31F used on the Su-27 (500 hours as opposed to 1000 hours). That a relatively small air force, such as that of Malaysia, should want to focus its resources on its more reliable assets should not come as a surprise.
Yes, while the new RD-33MK may not be in the same league as the US engine, it does have a higher TBO compared to the old soviet era RD-33, but i'm not so sure about the ZHUK-ME, but naturally it should be better than the old N019M radar.
dragonfire
New Member
I saw a pic on a defence blog which was taken a week or so back of a Malaysian Mig-29 taking part in the Lima Air show. The craft looked in decent condition. Have these Migs completed their service life, when were they procured ?
Ananda
The Bunker Group
From Asia Military Review
Can anybody confirm if this'is still true ? I asked this because I read somewhere that current Malaysian Administrations already reviewed this policy and decided to conduct drastic changes. This practice afterall simmilar on what happen with TNI AU on Soeharto era's (except the bumiputera in our case ware soeharto's childrens) specially so with the Procurement of Hawk 100/200. In short TNI AU had to end up with light fighters that cost as same as F 16 to procured and maintain.
IIRC, these refurbished MiGs were procured in 1995 and they should have plenty of hours left before end of life (which is why they are being offered for resale). One of the problems faced is the maintenance cost for the small fleet.
Last edited:
Agreed.
Source? There is no official confirmation of this sort. There is only speculation.
What? You want to retire the F-18Ds which are very capable strike fighters that are operational and trouble free (and replace them with the multi-role Su-30MKM, whose serviceability record is still unknown)? I understand that the F-18Ds have the best availability compared to other types in RMAF service. Further, the F-18D squadron has been taking part in international excises like Ex Pitch Black with the Australians (which is invaluable training for Malaysian pilots in coalition warfare) and they still have plenty of service life left.
I hope you are aware that the Su-30MKMs are not yet operational and it is a configuration that no one else operates. So at present we cannot predict their availability rates for the next 10 years, whereas the F-18D is a known quantity. Even Indian Su-30MKIs are starting to crash. Do you know what was the cause of the 2nd crash yet? Please update us if you have more info.
That is partially true. I believe the Hornets play a different role from the MiGs, as the Malaysian MiG-29s have limited A2G capabilities.
Has it occurred to you that MiG may have also contributed to the problem?
You hope. Did you read the old RMAF thread that is now closed? Evidently, reliable sources, like defence professionals and mods have confirmed the existence of contractual difficulties and that the RMAF are unhappy with Sukhoi support. Just because you imagine there is no problem and does not mean that there is no problem.
Really? Please cite source that demonstrates that supports the idea that the Russians have cleaned up their act (No offense intended to the Russian forum members). Even if you cite a source, I don't think you can compare the service for MiG/Sukhoi with that provided by Boeing for the F-18Ds.
Last edited:
Good news! In today's Malay Mail, the Defence Minister said that the 3 services with MINDEFs procurement division would be responsible for orering spares now. No more local companies who hike up the prices 3-4 times over.... at the expense of the taxpayer and national security. This is something that should have been done a long time ago.
I'm not aware of how the Chinese are faring with their customers.
The 2 MiG-29NUB [M43-01 and M43-02] trainers underwent a Programme of Preventive and Restoration Work [PPRW] at ATSC in Kuantan in 2005. As well as strengthening the airframe and the replacing time expired components, a Non Destructive Test [NDT] was performed on the aircraft’s airframe and wings to check for cracks and rust. As I mentioned earlier, they were first built in the late 80's for the Russian Air Force and never entered service.
The Russians have improved, because they've realised they have to if they''re going to attract new customers and compete in a global market that is becoming increasingly more and more competitive. Remember that prior to 1991, Russian companies didn't have to compete because they had a ready market in the form of Warsaw Pact countries and other client states. I remember going to Russians booths at defence shows in the 90's, the people there looked bored and were only too happy if you didn't ask any questions. Most of the time English was a problem, if you asked too many questions, you'd get a poster or brochures and they would walk away pretending to be busy. With the MKMs is still early days, only time will tell how well they'll do as far as servicibility goes. When it comes to product support however, no one come close to the U.S. and Europeans at the moment.
I'm not aware of how the Chinese are faring with their customers.
Last edited:
dragonfire
New Member
So are the fighters on offer to any particular nation/ Or has anyone expressed interest in acquiring them. The Migs if procured first hand in 1995 have got atleast 10-11 years more given a service life of 25 yrs and if maintained properly then can be upgraded (very costly these days though) and used for maybe 10 more years
Just read from Strum's post that these fighters were in storage prior to the purchase - so thats tht
Last edited:
I support the decision to retire the MIGs. it's been long coming. The history of the aircraft in the RMAF have been a long list of problems. lack of spares, low operational readiness and unreliablity. Malaysia purchased MIG-29 as an Air Superiority counterparts to the F/A-18 which were used as a dedicated strike fighter. It's malaysia first rude introduction to the Russian aircraft.
it was originally build for the VVS but never delivered. it was kept in mothball until Malaysia acquired it. The Malaysian MIG-29 rolled out of the production line around 1988-89.
Russian aren't well known for their hospitallity. I've had a dealings with some russians. they often get angry for some unknown reason. maybe they weren't paid well enough for all their troubles.
One of the good things about MKM is that, we share a lot of commonality with the Indian MKI. since India will build the aircraft locally, that means we can turn to India for many of the parts in case the Russian fail to deliver. The same happen with our RF-5E when US refuse to sell us the parts needed. we decided to turn to the Swiss,
That old aging Hornets have the highest operational readiness of all the fighters in the RMAF fleets. I will not lightly dismiss them.
dragonfire
New Member
Also there was a deal on some Avionic components. And there is deal for the training of pilots for the Malaysian Su-30MKM fighters with India as well. And Su-30 series might have more customers in the area which could also help
From what I know Sukhoi has a leg up on post-sale support. Still not up to par with Boeing, LM, and Co. but far ahead of the nightmare that is RSK MiG. Does anyone here have anything more specific on the maintenance contract for the MKMs? In the case of Venezuela a local service center was set up.
My take on the whole situation has been misunderstood. I mentioned the MKM will not face the same fate as the MiG's because of the numerous reports coming from the gov that they have identified their erroneous ways and will try to mend it for the MKM's as has been stated on the national news papers during LIMA, also STURM's post just proved it. The new Najib administration does really mean business and being a former defence minister, he I believe can see the problems faced by the MAF and doing all he can to mend the ways the nations defence is carried out. Perhaps if you take some time reading about this on the Malaysian newspapers online, you would have known about it.
Plus both India and China is capable of providing spares if things get tough, which i dont think will happen coz the Russians are getting serious about their product image.
On the Hornets, i dont see a future for them, whether or not they have a 100% readiness rate. The MAF cant go on an add more 2nd hand Hornets to make a proper squadron which is not a good choice, nor does it has the funds to replace it with the Superhornet, which has been dragging on forever. So what do u do with 8 hornets? Upon reaching operational readiness, the MKM's can do both the hornet and the MiG's job as well, which is why I think once the MRCA is selected in a few years time, we should do away with the hornets as well, or get stuck with operating 3 types of planes again.
As per the deal to change the MiG's for the 6 MKM's, i overheard that form Malaysiandefence.com, and try not to post replies in a confrontational manner, as it is against the rules of the board.
Plus both India and China is capable of providing spares if things get tough, which i dont think will happen coz the Russians are getting serious about their product image.
On the Hornets, i dont see a future for them, whether or not they have a 100% readiness rate. The MAF cant go on an add more 2nd hand Hornets to make a proper squadron which is not a good choice, nor does it has the funds to replace it with the Superhornet, which has been dragging on forever. So what do u do with 8 hornets? Upon reaching operational readiness, the MKM's can do both the hornet and the MiG's job as well, which is why I think once the MRCA is selected in a few years time, we should do away with the hornets as well, or get stuck with operating 3 types of planes again.
As per the deal to change the MiG's for the 6 MKM's, i overheard that form Malaysiandefence.com, and try not to post replies in a confrontational manner, as it is against the rules of the board.
India and China can provide certain spares but for radar and engine parts and troubleshooting, I think the RMAF will still have to rely on the Russians. As part of the support intrasructure established for their MKMIs and MKKs, does anyone know if the IAF and PLAAF have the capability to perform engine overhauls? In July 2009 the PO Ural Optical and Mechanical Plant was awarded a contract to spares to the RMAF.
Certainly, with only 8 Hornets, there's no economics of scale with regards to spares and support, but then again we don't live in a perfect world. Until the 18 MKMs are fully combat operational, the 8 Hornets are the only all weather strike asseis in the RMAF and the 2nd most capable in the region after the RSAFs F-15s. Until the RMAF reaches a point where it have sufficient numbers of fighters to meet it's operational requirements, IMO the Hornets should be operated until they're no longer economical to support.
Rather not get political here but as the former Defence Minister, the present Prime Minister should bear the blame on a lot of issues affecting the MAF now... Or should we put all the blame solely on Mahathir?? Eliminating the brokers/middlemen is certainly a step in the right direction, lets hope it leads to more positive changes.
Last edited:
dragonfire
New Member
AFAIK the Engine Overhauls for the MKIs of the IAF are done in Russia, it may change once the deliveries are completed but as of now the engines are sent to Russia.