Good… now: can you understand that LESS AoA means LESS energy bleed aka higher speed?
That is not what you said. Refer to the transcript.
I said I rather get more AoA and not be limited by instructor and “still not rate” (meaning the Mig29 cannot rate with the F16 anyway with the limitation).
You replied in response:
Which is hilariously false. So did you misspeak or is there a language barrier here?
If MiG-29 AoA was increased with instructor it would just reach stall speed in 1 turn I dont think anyone would want that especially since either way you lose the dogfight, having lower AoA means better retention which would be better which for the MiG-29 (especially the SMT) being a glorified missile bus works out better since youre most vulnerable when you are slow
1 Like
But the nose authority post stall is what the Mig29 is designed for. It will take skill to play but I rather have a realistic Mig29 than a limited one that cannot ever rate with the F16 anyway.
The Mig29 is stuck between a rock and a hard place. Being somewhere in the middle not feasible imo. If they removed the G limiter on the F16 (which is cool) lets remove some alpha limitations on the Mig is the way I see it.
But to make two completely different fighters the same because these players complaints it is wack.
1 Like
I said I wanted less AoA so we can get LESS energy BLEED and MORE rate, then you said that you would prefer to pull more AoA since you claim that it would still not rate, and then I stated again that with LESS AoA it would GAIN a lot of extra rate.
1 Like
Understood, but that’s not realistic to the Mig29.
That is wanting an F16.
1 Like
I want the MiG29 to rate an average of 0.5 to 1 degree less compared to the F-16C (which should not rate worse than the F16A) as per manuals. No more, no less
You may be right!
But it should not have its AoA artificially limited so unskilled players can pull as hard as they want on the stick and get the optimal angle of attack.
The Mig29 is a very tough cookie to fly and takes skill irl. It should be in game and capable of all of the above. But also take skill.
It does not have the FBW computer holding the pilots hand quite like the F16
Real pilots don’t agree with you
MiG-29 was actually not meant to fight low speed AoA fights dogfighting would be done at higher speeds with rate fights the whole low speed nose authority was a last ditch thing but typically you dont want to get in a slow radius fight right off the bat similar reasons to why MiG-23 pilots never dogfighted with 16 degree wingsweep but instead did their fighting in either 33/35 degree sweep or 45 degree sweep
I never said low speed. I said soviet doctrine it to cash energy in for immediate nose authority. They also pride themselves on post stall manuevers. So, If you can find doctrine stating otherwise that they are more akin to the west I will happily change my position.
Remember, you are a reasonable man. The Mig29 entered service with a pathetic combat radius of 80 nautical miles. It is a frontal aviation asset. They do not have time to go out and rate fight fighters.
They fly up get into a knife fight immediately get that nose on, kill and come back down. It is purely their design to end the fight as quick as possible. To ensure that, Mikoyan required that the fighter have high alpha capability to get nose on as quickly as possible and even high off boresight capability in the R73.
who told you this? soviet aircraft were not built for this at all, its a myth. They were (like any good fighter) meant to be able to do whatever the pilot wished for it to do, It can rate well or it can use nose authority but “dumping speed to nose authority” is a blatant lie and no sane pilot will tell you this was a tactic in any russian aircraft.
Change may with are in this case, if you can’t do the (easy) math from the chart you can look at the tables @ZVO_12_INCH has provided
That’s why, as I said MANY times (and you know it), I say in general instructors need a rework with a system that allow you to choose what AoA you wanna pull. The problem doesn’t exist with a stick it’s just a matter of pulling less (which you CAN’T do with mouse aim).
Also I love how you went from “I WANT MORE AOA” to “MiG29 is tough bird to fly”… looking at how you didn’t want to test the F-16 before it’s “almost like” (/s) you want the MiG29 to stay a brick lol…
I can find documents for days. But you made the claim otherwise. I will change my position if you can show me soviet doctrine stating otherwise.
Mig29s lacked combat radius and is not their design. They are Frontal Aviation assets. Point defense fighters. They are not meant to be out there long. Again, first mig29 had a combat radius of 80 nautical miles with no refueling capability and even designed to land at makeshift forward airfield in the event they cannot make it back to base.
The jet needs to kill opponents immediately and they are point defense fighters. He who gets nose on first was the doctrine of the time. They also designed the R73 to assist in this doctrine.
Again, if you can provide soviet doctrine stating otherwise, I will be more than happy to change my position.
The main concern when designing the MiG29 was designing an aircraft with great high speed energy retention and speed/zoom climbing ability, which are the same parameters the F-15 excel at (unlike the mig29 though the F-15 does it while carrying a lot of fuel and a radar that doesn’t need ground radars to be useful (that doesn’t mean once the MiG29 locks you at 10km it will be easy to notch because the radar has less power, stating this given previous conversations…)), as that is what matters the most in real life.
Dogfighting wasn’t the TOP priority, but nonetheless you are right that the mig29 was designed to be able to pull high Alpha, but that doesn’t mean that the bonkers thrust to weight ratio that it has can’t make it perform in a rate fight.
2 Likes
ok post one then :)
Ok while I pull literature. Are documentaries or videos of Airforce Weapons School Analyst acceptable in meantime? An expert and his literal job was determining soviet capability and doctrine in the Airforce’s equivalent of Top Gun.
If this is one of those constant peg pilots/analysts then no since theyve been proven time and time again they know nothing about the planes they “analyze” based on everytime they open their mouth on a MiG-23. Post a manual or good book. Or a interview with a pilot who is not western
1 Like
I swear to God it’s not constant peg LMFAO.
Not a pilot a soviet analyst from the US Airforce. He is USAF Weapons School Graduate (Class 15A), and a former FTU instructor teaching Air Battle Managers that would go on to crew controller positions in AWACS, JSTARS, and GTACS Squadrons. He also went on controlling tactical assets during OEF/OIF/OND, & running the unit Weapons & Tactics shop for the Airforce.
Who also says the Su27 was the principal threat of the United States with insane capabilities. He also speaks in regard to the Indian Mig21 Bison when they observed it how awesome it is and capable even against 4th Gens.
As for the literature, so you will not accept anything, but actual soviet doctrine written in Cyrillic? Can it be from western analyst source or nah?