You can't prevent monopoly. Sukhoi was picked as the winner in the 90s because the su-27 had everything the mig-29 but in bigger so better suited for their huge territory.
In the 1990s the bigger aircraft of the two made sense because there was no money for a lot of pilots and a lot of planes so you buy the bigger longer ranged more expensive type and be thankful there will be no conflicts where that will matter.
Today, money is less of a problem but the heavy Sukhois cost more money to operate than the MiG-35. The MiG-35 was intended as a numbers aircraft and that is what they need now.
They still need heavy Sukhois, but having only Sukhois would make the air coverage weak and operation of the air force expensive... even the US had the F-16 and F-18 and F-35 as lighter cheaper numbers aircraft because having only F-15s, F-14s, and F-22 would be too expensive for the US... who love to piss money away on shit they don't need.
Developement and production are so expensive that you can't invest in a company like mig that will produce 24 jet in tge next 15 years at best. Sukhoi gets huge orders so it's worth investing in it.
MiG is a design company that is a division of UAC/OAK. Sukhoi is also a design company that is a different division of OAK/UAC.
The money generated by each division can be used where it is needed.
Sukhoi doesn't cut any edge and produces high quality jets and now even civilian planes.
They filled their Superjet with western parts and western engines... what bastards...
Su-75 is a creation of their own cause they figured out a single engine will be better and cheaper than the su-57 for most countries around the world. Something the engineer at mig should have found out when doing nothing at office.
MiG already worked on the izd 33 in the 1980s and it was rejected by the Russian AF. The current light 5th gen fighter MiG are working on is a single engine type too.
But you are still not getting it. The SU-75 is not supposed to work on its own... it is supposed to work together with the Su-57... otherwise why the **** would a country care if it shares parts with the Su-57 if they don't buy the Su-57?
Are you sure?
Perhaps English is not your first language...
When the managers of the Sukhoi department become the managers of UAC/OAK,
Can be interpreted and meant many different ways and I suspect the way you are interpreting it is as:
"When (all) the managers of the Sukhoi department become the (all) managers of UAC/OAK,"
But I didn't say or mean that. I does not require all UAC managers to be ex sukhoi managers for there to be bias or influence and you provided proof that there is influence and bias.
So when did all this happen?
You are cancelling MiG... what else do you think will happen?
Tupolev and Ilyusion next?
I think Bulatov has gone soft. Probably intended to give MiG a chance to get back in the game.
Makes you wonder though, why they need Su-34 when an enlarged strike/interceptor Su-57 could be developed for the role...
From a fu#cked up Isos idea fix he repeats like some mantra.
Children in the west think if you lose an aircraft then it must be shit.
In war you lose aircraft, and tanks, and all sorts of things.
Some platforms have more dangerous missions than others so some will be more likely to be lost than others, but of course if you listen to the enemy reports of losses then your understanding is going to be skewed.
The fact of the matter is that the only planes you never lose are the ones you never use.
The cost in soldiers on the ground for not using Su-34s and Su-25s would be enormous, so of course you use both types and others to damage the enemy and destroy his people and his resources. An Su-34 might get shot down here and an Su-25 might get shot down there, but the damage they are doing is out of all proportion to their losses so using them just makes sense.
And the cry babies saying they should not be losing anything can continue to cry... war is hell... and not for children.
Gripen does not make sense to be bought from a customer point of view. You ends up being dependent from at least Sweden, UK and US, and its acquisition will not even give you brownie points for the US protection and immunities (like those big acquisition of American products from Saudi Arabia).
Its selling point is low cost operations, so it is cheaper to own than other types... and from the sounds of things that is a lie.
The only reason the platform reputation is alive is because of FAB, without which it would be a useless plane. If su34 RWR, ECM was upgraded along with MAWS with UV sensors and DIRCM/self protection suite it would be much more survivable
They developed all that stuff for the Su-35 and Su-57... makes you wonder why they don't bother with their premier strike platform.
Either way, it is susceptible to ambush and that’s an issue even with FAB as the most recent scenario showed
To be fair any aircraft would be susceptible to ambush... BUK and Viking and Pantsir can all operate in optical mode and be sneaky...
So the pre eminent air to air threat for the VKS will be F15 , not F22 , not F35 and not NGAD as it got cancelled
How unstealthy it looks... hilarious after decades of BS about stealth this and stealth that....