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?
Depending on weight it achieves 20 deg/sec at very different speeds.
Compared to F-16A it rates worse until 600kph, then it’s about the same, F-16A is oveperforming.
Compared to F-16C it rates better above 600kph but gradually worse below.
Turn rate is determined by how much lift the aircraft does compared to the weight, sustained turn rate is how much lift you do compared to the weight while having drag equal to thrust.
Lift, thrust and drag are (among other things) what you find the flight model, there’s no direct turn rate editor since it’s a product of those things
I’m still a bit confused. Is the MiG-29 actually underperforming ingame, or is it just that a lot of other airframes are overperforming compared to it?
There are some in the thread that believe the first scenario, the second scenario, and some that believe both are true.
If it underperforms is only because it’s missing an engine mode that would give it a little bit more thrust (which, like 102% engine trim for F-15, should be here since reliability is not a concern)
That’s by far the biggest reason. F-16C and F-15C are for the most part accurate and the MiG-29 has no problems against them in a dogfight.
F-16A instead is over performing by quite a big margin and so is the F-15A, so the 29 has little chance against them (outside the odd R-73 launch on the 29G)
4 Likes
Do the r27s still have less range than the r24s?
Yes but that is correct as far as I know.
The R24 was designed for longer ranges while the R27r/t were designed to be more maneuveral and has more drag because of that.
They later fixed the range issues with the r27er/et
Stuff like f14s, mirage2000, C variant of f15 and f16 and su-27 can be defeated by the mig29, it’s the little ufos that are the issue…
There’s also the instructor issue but there’s not much that can be done, even if we somehow convinced the devs to change it some players would complain that it’ll be pulling less AOA if they hypothetically adjust it to a ratefighter configuration, if they make it pull more AOA they’d complain that it’s bleeding too much energy etc. There are other aircraft that suffer from this same issue, best would be for Gaijin to make a mechanic for players to adjust the AOA of the instructor as they please, but i don’t know how complicated that would be.
It is underperforming Giovanni is ignoring completely wrong SEP
The R-27R out-ranged the R-24R, beat it in ECCM, and had superior maneuverability against agile targets… They underperform in-game but Gaijin is unwilling to fix it for balance reasons.
This isn’t directly related to the topic but the MiG-23 FM actually has a really similar issue to the MiG-29 FM, in which it uses a completely bogus Oswald (0.66).
In 23’s case it’s especially reprehensible since it’s an AR5 near rectangular wing.
Oswald does not correlate 1:1 from real life to the game and it never will. This is totally irrelevant.
1 Like
And yet US fighters have their real Oswald. I wonder why that is.
With this induced drag coefficient, can the FM even match it’s real glide ranges?
You are never thinking about what you are saying. This wing is AR5, almost rectangular, the oswald should be >0.9 but you come up with “well actually the Oswald ingame is not same as real 1-1”
Great! She flies nothing like real plane!
Such as?
Do you have an example from which I can test?
I am always thinking about what I am about to say. You are making claims about the game and yet you do not understand how it works. Oswald coefficient as shown in mathematical equations for a fighter at a static angle of attack does not translate directly to the game like you want it to.
F-15 had about 0.86 by my recollection.
There is such a thing as variance and then such a difference as >>0.9 → 0.666
The curve of the coefficient, won’t allow for this. As the example BBCRF gave for Su-27, iirc 0.7-0.75.
F-4 Phantom has over 0.7. MiG-21 has 0.67.
So yes, literally what you’re saying is valid, practically this is AR5 wing with the Oswald of a delta.
Asked for glide, will see if I can find myself later.
I’d like to see a source, regardless in-game it is ~0.75 for FlapsPolar1
For “FlapsPolar0” it is 0.8
For “Polar” it is 0.5
It is not a single unit that can be compared 1:1 with the real aircraft’s calculated Oswald Efficiency Number.
By comparison the F-4 is between 0.5 and 0.685. Where is the >0.7 you claim?
0.7 to 0.75? In-game it is 0.75 for Polar
So what exactly do you think this will change? Do you know that you can make a custom plane in the CDK and fly it in a user mission with the modified settings if you’d like.
So since I suck at this game apparently, and can’t get to rate this thing, h o w.
How do I maintain 20°/s without losing speed, as the instructor always likes to use like 23 or something.
Unless I use my stick, which I suppose I should just pull less maybe, how can I do this with m+k?
1 Like
What is SEP?