That’s how it works.
you can’t even trust the changelogs sometime
As the last one did say that the engine nale changed, yet the change was only on the dev server.
2 Likes
Ill take that. Thank you,
Didn’t see everyone’s response.
You posted a magazine interiview with a nameless matra business man as proof. Lets be a little fair in their beef and let them be.
An article citing matra officials can be considered a secondary source. Usable in reports. What he shared is worthless… kindly follow your own advice.
1 Like
There was no primary that was literally all you had was magazine interview with a nameless businessman.
Just let them share their sources. No need to pounce on either. @BBCRF has some interesting info as well.
Kindly listen to the senior forum mods as you said. Who suggested you stop interacting with me. Just as I asked since day one.
1 Like
Same here.
İ refused to grind F-16C, started with Barak-II cause i wanted to boost my Israel Ground line-up then switched to SMT and boy it was a terrible experience compare to Barak-ıı.
After i spaded F-16C i realized the performance difference and it was disgusting tbh.
İm expecting Su-27 and F-15 tbh.
But Gripen is on my radar.
I’m too lazy to search for everything on the Internet right now.
SMT has more drag because of the enlarged fin.
Global Defense Corp isn’t a trust worthy source
1 Like
The only significant aerodynamic changes, if you can call it that, is the retractable probe.
Which “fin” is enlarged?
Unrelated, but what is everyones take on the new engines? Also what fuel settings have you decided are best?
I am actually loving taking 20min internal and the drop tank. lots of fuel and you can drop it and be almost dogfight ready (still need to burn some off)
Still testing it in games but the SMT has definitely gotten a little faster I have outrun everyone pretty easy today on the deck. Before it was rare, I can get away in it now like other Mig29s.
Please guys, lets not start this “not acceptable website” trend
GJ has used many random sites as source. There are very few places out there that offer the information regarding these old weapons systems and the more we keep saying things like this:
No one will want to post anything of the hard work they just did in researching.
We already have much stricter rules when it comes to using operational manuals to change models because of this guy. Let’s not go down this path of “your website is too random.” None of that serves the game.
Again, GJ must use “random” sites there is just not enough information out there. Just put out the information and let the contents be scrutinized by the community. If they are false, it will be found out.
I remember Smin linked us the Elta radar in the Kfir’s source was from some random site in South America iirc. But the information was sound and literally all we had to go off of.
1 Like
What dead language? What are you talking about
There are six official languages of the UN. These are Arabic, Chinese, English, French, Russian and Spanish. The correct interpretation and translation of these six languages, in both spoken and written form, is very important to the work of the Organization, because this enables clear and concise communication on issues of global importance.
5 Likes
Did you guys did not even bother with sources??? Just the Global Defense one was a great read and has It’s got all kind of information on the radars and export radars. Ranges, Frequencies. Modes for the Different Mig29s and exports and Flankers, Indian and Chinese.
I would like people to actually go through sources when people post them instead shutting it down immediately as “nonsense” or “unacceptable”. Look, every site is rooted in some bias, you are only there for relevant data. Not the commentary.
I am going to research and verify these other radars of the aircraft I believe will come in game.
3 Likes
I have no issues with such sites but that website posts absurd claims
I thought the hump on the SMT is known as fin
Yeah I saw the random comments by the editor out of nowhere talking bad suddenly about the Su35. But its clearly his opinion. But the technicalities seemed on point and he didn’t take away from them. I am going through one of the Migs29 radar modes in the chart
I had no idea, yeah it does technically induce some drag.
But if they are going to model that hump that draggy, good lord.
Most airflow is already channeled down form the cockpit the hump is not go any higher or outward. I assumed it would be minimal.
Funny thing is as far as i know Mig21SMT’s hump doesnt add additional drag compare to MF or BIS model.
İf this situation only occurs on Mig29 then it should be revert.
1.F-15…AN/APG-63…Detection-16 targets\Escort on the passage-10 purpose\The use of missiles for 1 (one) target …
2. The detection range is 160 km. for a target with an EPR of 19 square meters (FB-111)…160 km. for purposes with an EPR of 3 square meters (F-5)…60 km.
Spoiler
- Su-27…the first version of the H-001 radar was designed and tested with a Passive phased array antenna…it was not ready by 1982 (they decided to bring it to the Su-27M in 1985, it received the designation N-011 and was adopted as part of the Su-35 in 1995)
- The second version of the N-001 radar was designed and tested in 1982-1985 with the help of the designers of the N-019 radar…It was adopted in 1985 as part of the Su-27…
- The N-019 radar was ready on time…serial production of the MiG-29 began in the second half of 1982…
How can we verify?
1 Like