Cause you mentioned my name on your previous comment clown.
This clearly shows you got some ego issues and you’re still coping.
Keep up the good work tho, i appreciate fans like you.
3 Likes
Hello, been discussing a lot on other topic and forums about the 29.
Yes I agree with some if you, the 29 should lose its dogfight against the F16, yet it should get some ways out or perform better in some domains.
I’ll try to make it short.
Since last patch 29 got more AoA which was more realistic and was a welcome change, previous 29 was struggling especially at low speed, now it’s better yet not as good as it should be.
Currently 29 is unable to super-stall which is strange and on the opposite side F16 is showing some quick recovery stall (almost super-stalling) which is far from its capabilities.
Due to not having any FLCS implemented in game F16 (and the 29 as well but not to the same extent as it makes it stall out for nothing) can pull more than 25° of AoA and sustain it which should be prevented as the aircraft is completely unstable (design choice).
Seems like the 29 is missing a few degrees of AoA and is unable to cobra but @MiG_23M gkt an answer saying it may get fixed. And ofc I’ll not talk about drag changes making the 29 rate worse than a Catalina…
I don’t want a 29 buff for the sake of buffing it and being better. I want to have planes that are enjoyable to fly and have somewhat realistic FM, currently F16 feels like it’s coming from ace combat and literally made me drop top tier, F16 are unfun to fight, and to fly imo…
I wish we had balanced aircraft with their strength ans weakness but for me rn, top tier doesn’t make any sense.
I’d rather play DCS to dogfight even if the models are not 100% realistic.
Anyway have fun peeps, Fly Safe
2 Likes
Wait, it got buffed recently? I don’t really scour through the changelogs, if it has I haven’t really noticed it, then again, it took a while for me to notice the nerfs after the major updates as well since it’s still among the fastest jets in the game regardless, and I’ve more or least been conditioned never to lose speed in top tier air rb lest I get third partied due to Gaijin’s wonderful spotting system.
1 Like
He is making stuff up or he is wording it very badly , it does less AOA with more drag right now compared to before the patch, idk how he can even remotely claim it can do more AOA now. Many charts are showing its doing SUBSTANTİALLY LESS AOA than it should be able to.Where is he finding this magical knowledge
I won’t really throw too much blame around, changelogs come pretty frequently and the full details are rarely published, usually datamines are required to get the full picture on what happens.
1 Like
Mig-29 SMT is the unfortunate result of 1,000kg of weight being added to a fighter platform with no increase in engine power/engine swap. It will never have a good FM no mattor how hard people may wish it.
The Mig-29 9.12/13 is still highly maneuverable in game and more than capable in terms of ARB performance requirements (high speed turning, acceleration) while its over all FM could get improved slightly the reality is that the F-16 is the unquestioned king of the 2 circle and only truly beaten in the 1 circle by thrust vectoring or canards. It will be the dominant 1v1 fighter for the rest of WTs existence.
Why the Block 50 was needed? It is not needed now but Gaijin is laying the groundwork for ARH/ARM/ECCM and these more advanced platforms can come to game with a certain amount of “future proofing” similar to how the F-4E/EJ Kai/Mig-21Bis/Mig-23M all came to the game and gradually received more advanced ordinance as the game evolved. Gaijin like to implement mature capabilites with the entire spread of previous developments all at once (recent RWR changes) the same will occur at top tier as Gaijin adds more sophisticated capabilites.
The Mig-29SMT is fine for the moment however the Mig-35 and later Su-27 will probably all be added eventually. Russia will have to “survive” with the second best jet in game for a patch, the next one coming in a month.
1 Like
I think there is competition for the F-16 in the future. Typhoon for example.
But as for the rest of it, Yeah I agree completely. Especially the last bit.
1 Like
People keep forgetting that Mirage2K should be the one circle king right now.
But somehow F-16 also beats Mirage2k in one circle.
3 Likes
The Mirage 2000 is also SEVERELY underperforming in thrust and should have better energy retention than it currently does, just like the Mirage F1c, both these planes did at leasr get their Magic 2 buffs, but for only having 4 missile slots, it should absolutely be a dogfighting specialist in game, as it is in real life.
2 Likes
that is indeed why i added the part “or he is wording it badly” because what he is saying in contradicting his own words it seems like
Mirage F-1C may be the worst 11.3 fighter. i would rather fly the tornado, at least it gets 4 9L 4 7F equivalent
Well first of all I never deny that SMT is good with its missiles, but as I stated in other replies a little improvement in FM is going to enable players to dogfight and make it more fun to play Air RB for SMT players and their opponents, while not making SMT too “OP” or beating the F-16c and dominate top tier in any means.
When it comes to Russian bias, I would say easy mode is true for certain BRs in Ground RB like 4.0~6.0, 10.7~11.7, but not really that much in Air RB, especially when most western planes dominate WW2 air RBs, and US dominate 10.0 and after. There is a reason why is there so many Ground RB soviet players and so many Air RB US players, people go for the “easy mode” nation when they don’t have a strong preference.
2 Likes
Thanks for the constructive feed back, I believe one part of Mig-29’s current problem is that it actually implemented similar FCS like the one on F-16 last patch, cuz I can hardly pull an SMT over 9G in a sustained turn. And I strongly agree the fun argument for top tier because currently that is not very enjoyable. Hopefully Gaijin will realize that and give it a fix.
2 Likes
Appreciate the calm and objective argument and reasoning here. I totally agree with the ARM/ECCM part and that is exactly the reason Gaijin almost given every nation a platform to launch those missiles. And I also don’t question F-16’s two circle capabilities. However according to my knowledge even with the extra 1000kg it should still have some chance in a 1circle fight (at least for the first few turns).
My observation is that the current poor performance can be cause by something similar to the FCS limit added to F-16 last patch as SMT was unable to turn past 9G which not only deprived its 2 circle capability but also severly affected its 1 circle turning since it largely increased its turning radius. SMT should be losing speed quickly or having harder time gaining speed/energy due to the extra weight, but it shouldn’t be having that much of a hard time turning if there is no such FCS limit. The reason I post with a video in MAKS airshow is to show how SMT is capable of maneuver IRL and that 1000kg is not that bad for its fliight performance.
And again I am not trying to promote that SMT should be the best jet but making it a little more capable in dog fight will make top tier much more fun to fly while keeping SMT the second best jet.
2 Likes
I agree it should be more capable in “all or nothing” short term high AOA maneuvers, however Gaijin seems to think it needs this poor performance to compensate for the excellent missiles.
The 1,000kg is still going to be a significant hurdle because the F-16C does not face that issue, the continual upgrade to engine performance is one of its best aspects over its long development. The F-16C is simply too potent for the current dogfight meta, however as i stated with the addition of thrust vectoring and canard fighters it will slowly lose its absolute dominance. Likely with the introduction of the JAS-39 Gripen at the end of the year a serious competitor to the F-16 for 1 circle will be introduced.
And hopefully the Mig-29 9.12/13/SMT receive some rework to their AOA, which i do beleive to be incorrect.
5 Likes
Su-27 and MiG-29M hold my beer
1 Like
This is correct, I don’t think the energy the Mig 29s are losing in a turn is technically incorrect, at least when talking about yanking full-back on the stick, the issue is that they’re not pulling hard enough to justify the loss in energy, hence why I think an aoa buff would be helpful, but not game breaking for it, they’ll have to be a bit more careful on how the tweak the underperforming drag though, as even a minor buff in drag will create a large difference in acceleration and energy retention, and while the current FM is underperforming, I wouldn’t want it to wildly overperform either because Gaijin chose to do a classic overcorrection.
Aside from that, I don’t have much to add other than the planned addition of additional countermeasures (just over 150 if memory serves me) to the 9.17 that was planned for the 9.19 but never made it into the production model, maybe a bit unrealistic, but the Yak 141 is already in the game, so this wouldn’t be too much of a stretch.
1 Like
That’s completely wrong, according to the charts from both aircraft manuals their sustained turn rates are not that different below 5000m, with the F-16A having a slight edge at higher speeds and the MiG29 usually rating a bit better at lower speeds (tough this depends on fuel loads, on lower fuels the F-16A if I remember correctly has again the advantage at like 3000m and above). But the difference is never more than 1 deg/sec in favour of either aircraft.
Meanwhile in a 1 circle fight the MiG-29 is comparable to the hornet, which is much better than the F-16.
2 Likes
Here you go: F-16C sustained turn rate, sea level, 22000 pounds total weight, about 1300Kg of fuel
the right graph for sea level is the 9th image in order.
(Right line to look at is the Ps = 0 line, in the lines above the plane is decelerating and in the lines below it is accelerating)
(couldn’t find the A at sea level right now, will post it as soon as I find the chart for it back, but the C shouldn’t be far off in terms of rate).
MiG-29 9-12, 13000kg total weight, ~2100kg fuel (manual is for the MiG29G as it is more easily readable, if you prefer I’ll also post the Soviet manual, remember that the MiG29G is a 9-12 with cockpit translated to from Russian to English) GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 Flight Manual Mig-29 .
4 Likes
What is “Max AB NPN” and “LPN?”
I’m pretty sure MIL = mil power = no afterburner as well