You should add that simple disturbance counts as chaff, and that even if they think that “hur dur clouds not modeled” that chaff 100% is and that it should be a toggle against chaff protection
1 Like
done, referred to page 10 for that. now let’s see what they say.
if u want to,you can post this report on reddit to try and gain traction like your last report. I would post it from my account, but it is really your report/sources, all I did was just write it so i don’t mean to take credit away from you.
This post was flagged by the community and is temporarily hidden.
3 Likes
Giving it back full MTI functionality gonna make it OP? Man, redditors are even worse that WT Forum dwellers.
Here is the page in the MiG-23MF manual that specifically says that by passive jamming they mean chaff
Page 178
1 Like
updated report with mig23m manual included and citing that specific part. does report look good now?
Looks good, only thing id add is the fact that H_j and H_z mean Height_Hunter and Height_Target, also do not forget to include the covers off each document, Gaijin wants those in the bug report too.
1 Like
I don’t see how the MiG-23M and MF airframe was problematic, just because it maneuvered less doesn’t make it “problematic”. Only early variants and prototypes were ever problematic, with spin and structure, but these issues were fixed by the time the ML started flying.
1 Like
It had plenty of issues with reliablilty of the airframe, engine itself, some technical quirks like the fuel tank that was later removed on ML version. And yes, i agree with you, most of the problems were fixed with ML, and MLD became extremely good and reliable aircraft (technicians during Afghanistan war maintained around 94-95% or aircrafts in combat ready condition, which is extremely high number for the environment of Afghanistan). But early Floggers werent good, it’s just truth.
added both that and screenshots of the cover pages (although im sure gaijin themselves couldve looked at the covers since… it is the first page of the damn pdf lol, though lets not leave anything to chance)
1 Like
holy multitude of files lol
2 Likes
I just started reading but that is wrong, there was one soviet document, documenting how to fire R-24 with the MIG-23MLA not simply the ML.
But yes the MLA naming scheme was not standardize as far as my research goes, sadly alot of my primary source and 2nd source has been lost to the old forum…
I just started reading but that is wrong, there was one soviet document, documenting how to fire R-24 with the MIG-23MLA not simply the ML.
Please share, I am fairly certain that it was just MLA radar name and not MiG-23MLA because as said above, MLA is not a real designation
Why have these overperformances not been fixed already?
First they fixed the flight models, made them realistic, then for some reason rebuffed them ahistorically and now they again overperform significantly.
I was going to report them (did all the testing as well) just to realize it didn’t even matter because they would say the same BS that they say when reporting the f-5 flight model.
They over perform from 0.5-1 g at most speeds
Gaijin loves money. Nerfing aircraft that brings money dumb.
1 Like
(Accepted)
r-13m/m1 wrong gimbal limit
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/L8wmirs5Cd9W
1 Like
Before of after launch?
After launch, I should’ve specified that. That sc of mine was lazy, but the point was sent
Edit* actually idk