Why is the first polar different than this one?
Are there further mentions of the RPT mode? Because I think we need thrust values to have any hopes of it being implemented, I don’t know how gaijin would estimate thrust with 1.5% extra foam
1 Like
because there is a polar from another aircraft and it is shown for training purposes. On the left are the poles of the velocity coordinate system. On the right, as you can see, the Cx is negative here
1 Like
oh ok so it is not a polar for the MiG-29.
Was any previous bug report written about the missing engine mode?
no
1 Like
I thought modern russian radars don’t have a look up (pulse mode)
maybe this? MiG-29 thrust - misinterpretation of the thrust charts // Gaijin.net // Issues
& this(mig23m’s one the techmod linked to in above report) MiG-29 incorrect Zhukovsky curves // Gaijin.net // Issues
1 Like
No,this all thrust
1 Like
These are not about the missing engine operating mode.
1 Like
So, I still don’t understand, I know the MiG-29s instructor uses 24°/s of AoA, and that takes away either the sustained turn rate at 20-21°/s or the higher ITR of 26-28°/s.
But why does the MiG-29 lose so much speed so quickly? Does it have too much drag and cannot generate enough lift?
Also how much better would the 9.15 be compared to the 9.12 and 9.13?
Haven’t been here in a while lol
The FM has too little SEP, and the SEP is shifted to the right, higher speeds.
The bleed rate is too high and by a lot but mainly at lower G.
1 Like
9.15 would basically function like a SMT but better ttw - so basically a more usable fox3 29, much better then current 9.12 or 9.13’s. Though as is without any base fm changes the 9.15 would still have the same inherent issues as the rest of the mig’s with large energy retention issues. Regardless, would be a very welcome addition to the game.
9-15 is a completely different plane. Its maneuverability is better in some places than that of the Su-27.
6 Likes
That’s not true, the MiG-29M has an enormous difference compared to the MiG-29s we have in game: it is unstable and has completely different air intakes. The first gives the aircraft much lower low speed drag for the same lift, since the stabilator pushes up and not down. The second gives the aircraft much better airflow at low speed, which is the reason why thrust is low at low speed. I’ve edited the MiG-29G FM to try to resemble what a 29M would be (I just put the center of lift in the same place of the center of gravity, which is the lowest form of instability (aka worst case scenario), increased engine thrust and increased empty weight) and tried it in user mission, and the the thing is a completely different beast.
It’s also a big step up in terms of climb rate, especially at higher speeds where the thrust to weight is not far off the eurofighter (at least at lower altitudes).
I’m the one that complained about the instructor: the instructor already pulls enough to put the MiG.29 out of the range where it is relatively efficient compared to other planes Lift/Drag wise, but not enough to give it really good nose authority, which is odd since in full real controls with damping the 29 pulls more than many other aircraft that will pull more with instructor on.
8 Likes
Compared to the basic Su-27 it’s probably better at everything apart from post stall/extreme AoA stuff.
4 Likes
According to StatShark estimates, MiG-29 has less ITR than F-16 or F-15.
How much more does it pull at damping? Or even manual? Like 26 or 28?
28 degrees on dampening, instructor pulls 22.
If it pulled 20 it would rate a lot better, if it pulled 25 you would 1 circle almost everything.
F-16s by comparison pull 25 with damping and 23 with instructor.
1 Like
At what speeds would it rate with 20°/s? And how does that compare to the F-16?
Also if you can edit center of lift in user missions, can you edit turn rate too?