I didn’t mention anything about the F-16’s overperforming at low speeds. They are though, the aircraft is incapable of handling 45+ degrees AoA with high roll rates or asymmetrical loads like it can in-game.
im just impressed with this, thanks for the work man.
I did some duels today with the smt against the f16adf, it literally feels like you are flying with the air brakes 50% open and if you keep trying to stay in the fight, the longer it lasts the worse it gets, you start falling out of the sky at some point and it was difficult to rate fight too or keep enough energy to point my noose, I couldnt gain speed fast enough (it must be because of the extra weight of the SMT, I think) or something also related to the new drag changes, I should have also tested with the 9.13 but I couldn’t today but anyway, i’m glad we have someone like you who is trying to fix the mig29s
2 Likes
YEP, the plane literally cannot keep speed and starts falling out of the SKY
1 Like
Thank you, I just stumbled upon the Russian speaking side of the forums and there was a lengthy discussion on whether the seeker had IR or thermal capability, and seems like it was a feature it didn’t have for the Kh-29TD… but it seems like a new can of worms was opened in the discussion wherein the SMT would be targeting pod capable
Quite interesting discussion, I would like to know if the Mig-29SMT could mount a targeting in War Thunder, it would be quite nice, even if it could only carry limited air to ground ordinance.
S/SE installation was available for 9.12 and 9.13 airframes
1 Like
No!.
1… MiG-29(9-12B) were delivered from Russia to Bangladesh in 1999…
2. In 2009 at LGARZ (Lviv) they have been upgraded to a level close to or the same as the MiG-29MU1…
Украина модернизирует истребители МиГ-29 ВВС Бангладеш - Украина промышленная (ukraineindustrial.info)
3.Since 2019, they are being upgraded on 558-ARZ (Baranovichi. Belarus)-according to the MiG-29BM project (9-11)… «Сравнимы с российскими МиГ-29СМТ»: Бангладеш сделал выбор в пользу белорусского варианта истребителя (topwar.ru)
Бангладешские МиГ-29 в Белоруссии: dambiev — ЖЖ (livejournal.com)
The project as of 2005…now 2023-Electronics/ Electronic warfare/Radar-most likely have been significantly modified… БЕЛОРУССКИЙ МОДЕРНИЗИРОВАННЫЙ . Взлёт 2005 10 (wikireading.ru)
1 Like
Specifications of current modification from Belarus.
Dorsal hump found in MiG 29 BM is missing on the upgraded Bangladeshi ones.I think they have only added a new radar and new suspended armaments from the BM version. So I think it is still a MiG 29B but with electronics and armaments from the BM.
1.It is impossible to convert 9-12, for example, into 9-13 without the capabilities of a serial factory…From the very beginning, the Belarusian ones were altered from 9-13 …
2.It’s for sure that the Bangladeshi ones are 9-12 … but the letter designation should change when replacing the radar…
3. Therefore, it’s better to find out the designation in the Bangladesh Air Force-from local comrades…
Looks like they haven’t changed the designation.
If we ever get 9-12B in game,are we going to get R-77 for it?Since Bangladeshi one is still designated as MiG-29B.
1 Like
What a strange question. If we will have Bangladeshi modernized 9-12B, maybe, who knows, for original 9-12B no, why would gaijin give it R-77.
Well that is true.Sorry for asking dumb questions.
The FM changes prior to that were the primary issue. This made it worse.
3 Likes
Some news regarding the repair of the MiG-29 flight model? It’s currently working really badly. It has even worse energy retention than the MiG-21 and it is less agile than F-4E (possible some exaggeration but the point is clear).
2 Likes
5 Likes
Why did they even make these FM changes, was it a Rogue Coder or something? Did someone make some sourceless BS bug report and gaijin just said yeah we destroy it’s FM now?
I am having a very hard time understanding the reasoning behind it , especially the fact that it happened at the same time with the UFO F-16 FM buffs
They implemented a new system for RateMax and LoadFactorMax to a bunch of aircraft including F-16s, deltas, Mirage 2000, etc.
When they did this, it broke the MiG-29 (although I think the MiG-29 was already underperforming still at that point).
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/398367636213334018/1155267697634988032/image.png
Beyond this, they’ve nerfed the efficiency of the flaps, the drag and lift in high AoA or spin conditions, etc. They’ve made the aircraft really unstable and unrealistically bad at nose pointing conditions. Any kind of AoA above the normal 14-24 degree limit results in excessive loss of airspeed and comically large instability.
8 Likes
So what is this RateMax system supposed to do ?? Previous Mig29 FM had BIG issues with AoA, especially in sim battles, it strangely seems to have more AoA now but the energy bleed is horrendous. Afaik, we have lots of informations about how the 29 behave and yet we can’t have a proper FM, and the F16 is even better at low speeds than the 29…
1 Like
Don’t take what I am saying now as certain, but from the tests I did today the MiG-29 9-12 rate actually matches pretty well this charts https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1130043915404320818/1154776868256497774/7-718665.png at all but the lowest speeds (under 460kph) where it underperforms a bit.
The 9-13 instead is probably worse than it should be (given only 200kg difference), but still not too far off.
Here is where problems start: the turn times on the graph I linked above (which is the one they used to responded to my bug report) matches perfectly with the Gs this chart (6.14 in particular)
provides only at speeds above 400 kph, then below that the turn times are too low when compared to the number of Gs.
The fact that those 2 graphs (at least 6.15) should be right for sustained turn rates overloads seems to be confirmed by the fact that this: GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 Flight Manual Mig-29 , which is from the MiG29G manual (same aircraft as 9-12A), has perfectly identical figures for 5000m.
Instead in 6.17 (the one they answered with), unless my google translate completely fucked up the translation, seems to calculate the minimum turn radius at various speed and then calculate the time it takes for the aircraft to do a 360 degree turn at that radius. In theory the minimum radius for a certain speed should equate to the maximum sustained load at that speed, the only explanation for this I can think of is that, since to achieve those small turn radiuses the aircraft pulls some serious AoA, a now very significant part of the force that acts vertically to the plane is not centripetal but just related to the aircraft “drifting” in the air (same reasons you could hit 16Gs in DCS)… but in game the AoA of the MiG29 is quite garbage, and while rate times should be correct, irl they were done with the aircraft pulling almost certainly more AoA that it is currently doing, which means that the induced drag the aircraft has at the current maximum AoA of about ~22 degrees is too much.
At higher sustained speed this is not an issue both because of lower AoA and (maybe) too low standard drag coefficient (I don’t know if the MiG29 could hit 1575kph on the deck, most sources I see state 1525kph as max speed).
Apart from all of this, it seems to me that many aircraft are completely over performing in rate fights. Apart from the F-16A, that we all know is an UFO right now while it should rate very similar to the MiG29, ,many other aircraft like the MiG23MLA right now can rate at absurd degrees second (managed to hit 25 in the MLA with min fuel and no missiles), which is way more than what it was capable in real life.
2 Likes
Efficiency of the flaps though was right to be nerfed… with the old flight model when using mouse aim with flaps the sustained turn improved so much that at 430kph it achieved the same deg/sec as the optimal 700kph…