i asked ralin if he was gonna make a report on it, he said he would do it one day
1 Like
I just want the MiG-35 not to crap the bed speed wise once it passes mach. </3
For a starter wing alone doesn’t resume the whole drag. Secondly even when wing is taken into isolation, it isn’t as straight forward as you think. Higher wing surface doesn’t automatically mean more drag as drag depends on parameters such as speed , AoA and obviously wing profile .
Had all parameters remained the same ( except for wing area ) you could had made that claim but we know it is not the case as M derivates ( that includes 29KR and 35 ) have received modified wing profiles, sharper leading edges and the higher wing span ( which contributes to lower induced drag albeit this plays a bigger role to subsonic / transonic regimes ) .
Bottom line is unless you have some practical aerodynamics manual for 29K / 35 which can be compare to existing 9.12 manuals that’s a baseless statement.
3 Likes
Obviously.
“have received modified wing profiles” In what way exactly?
“sharper leading edges” It has a sharper LERX which helps with vortex formation, this mainly benefits maneuvering performance by aiding in vortex generation. I do not see how this improves supersonic drag. Maybe reduces pressure penalty but there are too many variables to say anything. The MiG-35 in-game is already significantly superior to the MiG-29S in terms of turning performance and energy retention that cannot be achieved by just making the wing area larger, this is modelled.
“higher wing span” Which is the main reason for increased wave drag and drag from friction.
Unless you have a practical aerodynamics manual for the MiG-29K/35, claiming the drag in-game wrong is completely baseless. If you have sources, you can submit a report and it will be looked at.
whatever it may be with the wing, i think we can all agree that the Mig-35 shouldnt have a higher drag coefficient for the fuselage than the 29SMT
5 Likes
That doesn’t look right yeah. Maybe the dev justification is a lot of form drag from the canopy and APU exhaust? Either way I don’t see it being so high.
1 Like
wouldnt make sense either since it is also higher than the Mig-29KR
and i would argue that the drag coefficient fot both the 29KR and 35 should be quite a bit closer to the 29M
1 Like
That makes 0 sense unless they’re seriously trying to model miniscule form drag increases from the new MAW sensors which sounds silly
1 Like
Even if that is the case that seems like quite the jump from just the MAWS sensors.
but even then the 35 also loses the hook which would decrease the drag
1 Like
Yeah, it would be so miniscule that it wouldn’t actually be worth modelling
1 Like
Should also note that the MiG-29Kr/35 have fuselage changes that decrease drag compared to the legacy 29S (not that they have lower drag than the 9.13 etc., but there are things that offset the increase to some extent)
exactly
that is why i said that the Cd for the fuselage should be way closer to the one on the 29M
and the 29KR and 35 should be probably the same as well
2 Likes
Not only LERX , droop leading edge is also visibly sharper compared to more rounded edge on 9.12 :
Aerofoil also got modified ( chord , camber etc ) according to various sources .
29K prototype
It plays a major role specifically into supersonic regime since a sharper edge minimizes wave drag by allowing the shock wave to remain attached directly to the tip .
As stated above wave drag is primarily influenced by the leading edge not total surface. Parasitic drag/friction drag is indeed influenced by total surface .
Well im not the one who made that claim but regarldess.
I simply responded to your claim that higher wing surface had to necessarily mean higher drag by pointing to the fact that it isn’t as straight forward as you make it to be since there are differences between the designs other than the obvious increased surface.
The whole point is you can’t objectively make such technical claim without proper documentation.
That is not exactly on the same level with people here subjectively claiming that there is likely something wrong with drag when a MiG-35 fails to accelerate on almost level flight at 3k alt …
Pretty sure this is for the 9.31 not the 9.41R.
Also I found a prettty nifty pic of the 9.31 next to a 9.41.
1 Like
Indeed it is 9.31 , 9.41 is a direct followup of 9.31 .
I think for the sake of your argument it doesn’t matter much.
Afaik the Aerodynamics of the 9.41 models were further improved over the previous 9.15/9.31 models so you would be correct either way.