Has anyone tried using 6x R73s only and 20 min fuel with drop tank? it’s pretty decent missile slinger.
Even with 30min and 2 r27ER it’s a great fighter, as it has still great speed, great zoom climb, very good radar and excellent (borderline op) missiles…
the problem with it is that imho it’s just not fun playing a plane that is only carried by missiles and speed. I had way more fun gunning people down with the old flight model instead of having thrust vectoring unflarable from the rear missile go vroom.
Edit: especially since we are talking about MiG29s, not planes that were kinda born to be missile carriers such as the F4 Ej kai
1 Like
I have to disagree its not. Its absurdly heavy with two 700+ pound missiles strapped to each wing.
Climb is terrible, its recovery is terrible.
4:1 kd in it (going down a little) I am still not going to lie. Its speed performance is atrocious to all other fighters at 12+
Radar is awesome though. (little too good imo)
It kind of does remind me of an F4 with better missiles and avionics. Now that you mention it.
To me it does not feel terrible at all in terms of zoom climb (climb at over ~800kph IAS). It definitely feels terrible as soon as you turn a little more than you are supposed to (I always press negative pitch up key to never pull too much), but the missiles will do the turning for you.
If anything the only real difference from the MiG29A that I really feel (apart from less turning speed bleed, but all mig29s are bad at it you shouldn’t turn much in the first place) is the low speed acceleration
1 Like
About that and the whole “other flight models are too good”… German F4F rates similarly to it, which is certainly bs, as both the T/W difference and aerodynamic development are HUGE
1 Like
Zoom climbing? those days are over with. We are in the generation of unrestricted takeoffs straight from gate. The F16C can go Mach in a 85 degree climb straight from takeoff last time I checked.
If you must zoom climb in any of these fighters at 12.3 you are in trouble.
I just thought the Mig29 did not need to zoom climb with those insanely high thrust engines. Guess I am wrong though.
interesting.
If F15 comes out and the SMT is still in this weird state. It will be utterly obsolete. Can you imagine, no SMT is going to catch that thing and every time they think they get in range. The thing will just fly off into the sunset.
I am very eager to see what GJ decides to do with the Mig29 series now that we been talking about its pros and cons.
MiG-29A intakes have the problem that they limit low speed thrust on the engine… thrust is still bonkers, but it loses way more than other aircraft lose (that’s why they enlarged the intakes on the M variant).
Personally I had a lot of success, especially when there is a lot of fog, in climbing to over 11000 meters, launching ERs in TWS at targets over 60km away and then dive all the way to the deck while notching a bit if necessary.
1 Like
I believe you, but that climb rate is straight boo boo and regaining energy even after successfully dogfighting is no good.
honestly its climb rate feels like a Tomcat A model. I think those AoA changes need to come and also straight-line acceleration without maneuvering needs to be improved. Especially in a dive.
Per my source, the MiG-29 and Su-27’s pitch aerodynamics are highly regarded in comparison to the F-16 which was required to lock maximum permissible AoA to 25 degrees to avoid deep stall and departure conditions.
2 Likes
I totally forgot about the f18.
Can you guys imagine too if the F18 comes out and the SMT is still in this weird lack of AoA state?
That thing has amazing nose authority its going to murder this current Mig29 FM.
MiG29A in performance is actually very close to an F-15 with a better sustained turn rate when dogfighting. The whole purpose of the MiG29 itself was to be a frontline fighter that would have flight performance comparable to an F15 while also capable of dogfighting well, this at the expense of range.
The SMT instead just gets slaughtered by an F-15C in everything, as it basically is a way to bring the improvements of the MiG29M whiteout actually re engineering the aircraft.
That’s why imho adding the SMT and the F-16C were bad choices. I would have saved up the F-16C for later and instead added the F-15A and the F-18 in October, while the USSR could have gotten something like the MiG-21-93 now and the MiG-29S in October. This and additions to other nations would have been enough to allow the introduction of the Gripen and fox3 missiles in December. Then go F-15C and Su27, and later MiG-29M, Eurofighter, Rafale etc. and cap top tier to the late 90s tech.
Instead now, unless they add the Gripen with something like only aim9L, we are never going to see an F15 and an F18 with sparrows (which were an important stage of their service) as aim120s will be already around, while the SMT might be the last land based MiG29 we will get in the tech tree, as Gaijin will probably focus on the more “famous” su27
F-18 high alpha capacity is much better than the MiG-29, on par with Su-27.
I kind of agree.
However, the Mig29 is not going Mach completely vertical like the F15. Both are going to wreck this current SMT fm if it remains the same. The F15A is pretty light, and the C is the premier air to air performer that is true.
The issue is the thrust it will pull away regardless of a slightly better of sustained turn rate. It will have the ability to choose on its own terms to engage and disengage. Exactly how the F16C is right now.
Rate fighting in the F15 is not something I would do anyway in the F15.
I would like to see sources on sustained turn rate. I am skeptical.
I can totally see the Mig29 having a smaller turn radius but sustained turn rate? I do not see it when the F15 has those insanely powerful engines.
I always knew the MiG29 wasn’t far off the F-18 and Su-27 (without AoA limiters removed of course, when using supermaneuvrability the 29 obviously can’t compete, but at the same time this would waste all of the su27 energy)
2 Likes
The problem as I mentioned previously isn’t the high alpha capability, it’s the low speed maneuvering / instability and stall recovery. MiG-29 sucks because of that and the high alpha performance is how you’d go about fixing it.
2 Likes
Right now the SMT is the one that can choose to not engage, F16C simply can’t climb at 1450kph as it barely reaches that in a straight line.
9th picture is for the F-16C (that rates way better than the F15C), 11th picture is for the MiG29. Not posting the pictures themselves as some guy said the F16C one might not be allowed on the forum.
MiG-29 (13000kg, of which 1600kg is fuel) should rate at about 20 deg/sec at 650kph (~350knots), F16C (9980kg, of which 1100kg fuel) does 20.5 deg/sec at that speed. Difference is never mode than 1 deg/sec until MiG29’s G limit becomes 7.5
2 Likes
I’m not following you then… the fact that the MiG29 is unstable at high alpha is a problem in game, but in real life it should be better than that
Bro you are bugging! No way I can run down any SMT. I will post some videos of each clean and combat loads.
I have full authority when dealing with the SMT in the F16C. That is a little out of pocket assessment. I have to ask, do you have the 16C?
Nope, I only have the SMT… but I have never seen an F16C go over 1500kph, the SMT can easily go past that