I’m not gonna bother reading the wall of text after the first one you sent, it’s such a simple issue. The wall of text is totally unnecessary to get your point across.
The MiG-29SMT is not pulling less with instructor because it’s more limited, rather because it pulls less due to the change in weight and center of gravity. It’s just not as good as the MiG-29G. Expecting it to perform as well kinematically is just an unrealistic expectation. The issue you claim will affect the flanker is not a real issue.
I’ve test flown the MiG-29G and the MiG-29SMT fully upgraded, I’ve looked at the FM files. I know what I’m talking about and it’s based on tangible evidence. You need not play the game countless hours and matches every week just to earn the right to speak on the forum as you’ve insinuated in the past.
Though if that’s the requirement I’ve done nothing but exceed it.
I don’t think that’s really relevant to the topic, but in my defense I work a full time job and part of that job requires me to work long hours or be away from my computer for long periods of time. I’m not always able or willing to put hundreds of matches down a month. Not everyone working full time wants to come home and play the game. There’s nothing wrong with spending your free time doing other things, like sharing your knowledge or discussing REAL problems.
It’s not relevant to the discussion how much I play anyway, my opinions are based on something tangible and not emotional. You want the MiG-29 to be more than it is now… unfortunately for you it is performing as accurately as we can get it and there is little headroom to improve it further.
I’d appreciate it if you took a less hostile approach to conversation.
You are trying to say that the instructor is limiting the SMT more than the G. That’s something directly linked to the code, which is something we can directly look at.
There are 25 lines changed from the G to the SMT. This is related to the additional fuel tank & tank capacity, the 10kgf difference in thrust, and a 0.007 change in the drag coefficient “CdMin”.
The part of the file related to the instructor is identical.
Even though the amount of time spent in actual matches with the 9-12G or the 9-19 over the earlier models is irrelevant, the amount of matches I’ve flown in the 9-13 and 9-12 have given me sufficient knowledge of how well they play in the current meta (which has changed little). The addition of the R-73 gives them more potent weaponry and the additional weight to the SMT makes it less useful in a dogfight (it already loses to the F-16 in the 9-12 iterations). The meta is indifferent since last patch.
Is this your way of saying the G is not better than the SMT carrying R27ERs in a dogfight and more fuel?
It’s your only way because you havent really played either.
The instructor limits the capabilities of the Mig29 as a whole. You going to say it doesn’t? Stop trying to obscure because your feelings are hurt again.
When did you become a developer and all-knowing in what values can be touched that changes how any given model performs in game?
When did you become a developer? The moment you gained datamining tools? I am genuinely asking.
consider this if the 29G has more fuel it still could be lighter unless the 29G is like max fuel and the SMT is significantly lower some gap like that, please give specific fuel figures and I can tell you which is heavier or not actually
The instructor limits all aircraft on purpose so that they don’t bleed excessive speed in mouse aim. The devs have done this intentionally. Mirage 2000 players complained about it, and when I reported that it seemed excessively limiting to me they fixed it. If you want a similar change for the MiG-29, you can report it. No one is stopping you.
I have my own opinions, based on actual evidence AND my own personal experience and feelings when testing the aircraft. I’ve flown it in actual matches, I’ve done testing in test flight. It makes no difference. I know what I know, and it’s factual. I pointed out something you were wrong about, and I added my own opinion to further the conversation and you reply hatefully and disrespectfully. It’s not necessary.
You don’t need to be a developer to understand what is happening with the 9-12G over the 9-19 FM’s. The 9-19 is heavier, the center of gravity shifted unfavorably. It performs worse due to this. It has other advantages like the radar.
Do you dispute any of the facts I’m sharing? Do you think the SMT is being manipulated unfairly?
The SMT weight balance is different than the MiG-29G’s even if the total weight is less due to ordnance or fuel.
SMT is flying 18min fuel (no drop tank) armed with 4xR72
The G can fly 28mins (no drop tank) armed with 4xR72 and sometimes both R27ERs
The G is still significantly better in roll rate, turn rate, pitch, alpha and climb over the SMT
Which weighs more and by how much. Remember the #1 fuel tank is the spine of the Mig29. Its always filled first. The SMT on average has less fuel in the wings as well or should be historically. Roll rate should not be degraded as it is in game especially if flying with 20 or less.
the Mig29G has no regard for full fuel and should not because Mikoyan developed the aircraft to carry the max fuel and stay combat effective in dogfighting. thats why it also has a poor radius outside of what it was designed to do, point defense.
for simplification do you happen to have WTRTI or the client that reads out performance like AoA, turnrate, G pull, etc just to quantify the difference
also whats the max fuel time of the G before take off with full internal fuel I need that for calculation (I dont have German TT so I cannot check myself and 9-13 has more internal fuel)
if you could give specific performance differences it could numerically would be helpful
but anyways in the fuel times you gave the SMT is infact a few hundred kilos lighter, however* Im gonna have to point out when MiG-23M was talking about the code earlier he was right the FM code between the 9-19 and 9-12G are pretty much the same in terms of flight performance, only 10kgf more thrust (nonfactor because its so little) and SMT is very slightly more draggy.
So if the SMT is significantly lighter it shouldnt perform worse still, I understand you’re going off ingame experience but based off the way youve described it, I doubt it has been quanitified so if you could use WTRTI or a program like that to show differences in performance to prove (numerically) the SMT is performing worse then it’d be enough to convince me and I’d be happy to assist in putting together a bug report to fix the modelling error
The 9-12 and 9-13 do not have a spine fuel tank, the wing tanks raise a bit in the center to fill that area but it is mostly flight controls. The 9-19 has a spinal fuel tank. The radar is different. The center of gravity shift is likewise going to be greater.
Looking into it, appears the MiG-29SMT might require more drag to account for some of the additional surfaces like the refueling probe. They are quite large.
They are roughly the same has been my point and sometimes the G is outright heavier when I engage in dogfights because I was unable to launch the R27Es, and I rushed the furball. Which only the G is capable of doing without such heavy degradation of performance. I can enter matches with no regard to fuel really in the G.
Also I was generous about the 18min.
I do want to simplify my stance here because I am certain the SMT should not be this degraded to this degree. But want to be fair to each fighter.
So I will simplify my scenario.
SMT 15min internal 4x73s
G 28min 4x73s
Both aircraft begin engaging in dogfights in RB. What is the weight of each and how detrimental should the performance be of which is heavier.
That number 1# fuel tank in the spine is larger therefore more fuel sits in the center of gravity of the SMT and less in the wings. So, it should already not suffer in roll really unless full imo.
SMT in that scenario is a few hundred kg lighter like I said what you’d expect is turnrate to be worse, AoA would be the same since thats unaffected (see below with 9-13 and 9-19 at roughly same speed and altitude and instructor pulling the exact same AoA)
Agreed, AoA should remain the same, however at differing high Mach numbers the SMT seems to not want to pull up as much as the G and at times playing both back-to-back nonstop the SMT is the only one that gets me killed because of it. The roll rate at low alt as well.
I still (and I know I probably sound like a broken record at this point) would like it if you quantified the differences, I suspect you might be experiencing a sort of placebo effect making you perceive the SMT is performing significantly worse in the conditions you listed. I dont have the 9-12A/G so I cannot compare myself. I have the 9-13 and in my comparisons the things you described where not happening, but maybe if its a bug it could be a 9-12 thing so if you could test with WTRTI or the other one people use and compare it would be great help. There could be more at play still and tommorow ill look into it with more depth since lately I find myself playing the SMT more anyways (R-73 neuron activation) and enjoying it. But like I said I can only compare the 9-13 and 9-19 from my end
P.S if you compare the 29G with 20min fuel and SMT with min fuel and make it in test flight so fuel stays the same constantly the 29G is only 220ish kg heavier than the SMT which would make good testing parameters
