The MiG-29 (9.12, 9.13, and 9.19) is in my opinion, underperforming in terms of flight model. The SMT, to be specific, easily has the worst top tier airframe in terms of retention. The MiG-29SMT can easily lose to any other aircraft in it’s BR range (11.7-12.7, excluding the Harrier) and even some 11.3s like the JA37D. Despite this, I feel the MiG-29 should at least be on par with the F-16 (or a bit close) considering it’s real life performance.
The image above shows that the MiG-29 and F-16 are quite evenly matched, and while I’m not trying to make the MiG-29 the best dogfighter ingame, it is underperforming.
Even it’s flight performance prior to the Sons of Attila patch would be adequate.
1 Like
Real-world flight performance is limited by what the pilot can handle. Pilots can easily handle 12G for 3 seconds in the game, but 10G for 3 seconds is the limit in real life. Similarly, Japanese World War II aircraft could not perform 7-9G overloads at speeds above 450km/h, as in the game, unless the pilots were Hulk.
3 Likes
then why are all f-16’s allowed to bee so stupidly strong with their flightmodel overperforming from every topic there was about it
Because of how fly by wire is modeled
Obviously, as a game company all over the commercial beast, making money is the first priority, whether to restore, restore is in place, are secondary content
Gaijin is delaying implementations of reports that would make the F-16 more accurate in its flight performance (and thus would be a nerf). The question is why the implementation of these acknowledged reports are being delayed when flight model reports are some of the quickest reports to usually be implemented.
What about the F-16 flight model is over-performing in your opinion?
I mean, it says they are evenly matched in air combat. It doesn’t say that the flight models are evenly matched. It specifically mentions the F-16s lack of look-down/shoot-down capabilities due to the radar and lack of radar guided missiles.
It’s also using 9Ls against R-73s.
The turn rate comparisons give no additional context about weight and speed. The fact that the report considers them equal air combat adversaries, when the F-16 has a huge weaponry disadvantage, is actually indicative that the flight performance of the F-16 is vastly superior to bridge the gap.
Since when are flight model changes the quickest reports to be actioned lol?
As far as I know - the reports on the F-16 are to do with it not losing control/stalling at certain AoAs, which is a game engine limitation and probably affects many planes.
We have two different reports existing here.
One report shows that the developers acknowledged the F-16s are overperforming in being able to do manuevers that otherwise would cause deep stalls or departure from controlled flight IRL. They stated that it would need to have FLCS implemented for it because otherwise it would brick mouse aim. This FLCS should limit its AoA capabilities which is overperforming. However, Su-27 now has FLCS while it’s been 10 months for the F-16 to get theirs.
Since forever, I can give you some examples. F-111 and Gripen reports are the two most recent ones iirc, and both planes had their reports implemented in under a month compared to say radar or missile reports.
1 Like
Yes, they tend to prioritise Russian vehicles quite a lot…
Should’ve clarified, I mean evenly matched in terms of sustained and instantaneous rate.
Your own source contradicts that though? It shows the F-16 having a better instantaneous rate.
GJN uses much more detailed energy-manoeuvrability graphs to model the flight performance of the F-16 and Mig-29, and according to those both are correct.
This is an aggressor re-evaluation, as the current aggressor, the F-5E, was inadequate. This is only in terms of replicating modern enemy aircraft, not combat performance. The article means the F-16 and MiG-29 have similar dogfight capabilites.
the MiG-29 is just a worse aircraft than most people were led to believe
3 Likes
again, whoops on my part.
No it doesn’t.
Honestly surprises me that so many people on these forums are shocked Russian and Chinese vehicles are overhyped. Look at the countries who bought F-16s and MiG-29s, it tells you everything.
Wait…now you’re arguing that the F-16 flight model is accurate?
1 Like
It’s not the lack of FBW the Mig29 has an issue with. It’s the drag coefficient. They added a ton of drag to the FM when the F16C was released and never changed it back.
1 Like
Look at the RAND report on East German Mig29s after reunification. The author pontificates on how the Mig29 has, in certain aspects including energy retention and AOA, better flight characteristics.
The Mig29 is one of the best dogfighting aircraft in the world. As is the F16. In the game, it is not nearly up to par with what it is capable of. It’s a one circle fighter in game.
And who bought what tells you nothing besides their political alliances. Buying Russian tech aligns you closer to Russia than many countries want to be. It’s a socioeconomic nightmare buying defense materiel.
Old MiG-29 Flight Model
New MiG-29 Flight Model
The key difference is specific excess power that is available in max performance turns; The Old MiG-29 flight model was still accelerating in the initial turn and had SEP of +352 m/s. The New MiG-29 is decelerating in the initial turn and has an SEP value of -146 m/s.
The new FM pulls more AoA for the similar initial turn and ends up having orders of magnitude more drag; hence the MiG-29 flight model feels like its falling out of the sky as soon as you attempt to max perform a turn.
The F-16 was also hit with similar changes when its G-limiter was removed but it was much less severe.
The way this translates in game is that under the old flight models, the MiG-29 had an advantage in initial turn and the F-16 had the advantage in sustained turn. With the updated flight models the F-16 just walks all over the MiG-29 in initial and sustained turns. The only viable MiG-29 is the MiG-29G…and the only thing he can hope to do is throw an R-73 after max pulling with the HMS.
2 Likes
As accurate as any other flight models GJN makes, yeah. It matches the data they’ve used. If you disagree with the data they’ve used, that is a different issue. The inaccuracies I know of, are with the high AoA/post-stall behaviour, and that isn’t what makes it better than the Mig29 in a dogfight…
I find it very hard to believe a company with a track record like GJN would purposely under-model the Mig29’s flight performance.
In your screenshots, the new FM is pulling significantly more AoA, g, and deg/s. Amusing that you always bash on Gripen players for “holding the stick back and turning their brain off”, when that is what is causing the reduction in SEP.
