He is talking about MiG-29Ks iirc, and their equipment. We are talking about pre-production airframes of MiG-29M and they were equipped with OLS-M
he is talking about 9-15
there are no 9.15 airframes in service, saying that they recieved OLS-M in 2005 is utter nonsense.
Even if we take, for example, dry facts and only say that only airframe 151 had OLS-M installed (This airframe was used for fire control system tests), there is a still at least a mock-up of IRST installed on 156 airframe that you can see on photos
are you at least 10% enginer and worked in RSK for expertly challenging this person words?
where are the signs of ols29m
it can be default ols29
Is this person at least a 10% engineer and worked in RSK?
Matter of fact is that something is installed there and later is removed from the airframe, making it lighter. And if it was removed, then there is a chance that some other avionics was removed as well.
lol, you really dont now who is this guy
ok
LMAO do you think it was removed to lighten the plane? genius
btw avionics is already 9-15 much lighter than on 9-12 if you remove all what you can you will probably make it lighter by 500-600kg this is absurd
and avionics almost always located at the front to the center of pressure at M<1 so its weight has a large lever to the center of mass, so if you remove radar and etc you will do cobra after takeoff or increase the aircraft balancing losses to an absurd level
1 Like
reading comprehension issue. You have something that has weight. You take it away. Thing go lighter. How are you this dense?
why should i?
It’s John mig himself
2 Likes
Can you be… a little more specific?
F-2A for example has an empty weight of 9,500kg while the F-16’s can vary from 7000kg to 9200kg.
Heavier does not mean worse. The F-2A is a much better in flight performance cause of the bigger wings etc. MiG-29M has bigger control surfaces. So how do you explain that?
F-2A has the F-16C engine. The MiG-29M has way more thrust. The thrust should cancel out the weight and the control surfaces as well.
Heavier does not mean worse. Lighter does not mean better. Simple. Weight does not matter if its placed right and has the power it needs. The MiG-29M was supposed to be a modern 29 that kept the agility of the early fulcrums and the reputation it had and improve it.
8 Likes
go read some books
As expected, when you have nothing to give an answer, you are saying something like this.
Answer is in the books
3 Likes
Maybe the real books are the friends that we made along the way?
2 Likes
Im just joking around, I have no idea who this person is supposed to be lmao
1 Like
It still doesn’t really fix the biggest problem being the negative SEP lines which are still abysmal compared to the 16C which itself is nothing special when it comes to negative SEP lines.
Your method of balancing fuel here is arguably worse than just assuming 30% fuel because having a set fuel mass benefits heavier aircraft and different aircraft have drastically different fuel consumption. If you really want to balance fuel you want to give every plane just enough fuel for X amount of afterburner time at dogfight speeds but I understand that’s a bit more involved but not hard, as statshark can calculate fuel consumption.
If I do it this way, the performance of the MiG drops drastically, becoming almost the worst, so I assume they have the same amount of fuel to evade that, but I’ll try what you suggested to see the results