According to this schedule, the aircraft is able to climb vertically up to a height of 1 km
At the same time accelerating
During this test I was able to accelerate to 970 km/h in 1.11 seconds in a 6G turn at 2000m. This seems accurate, but at lower speeds it does not. Likely has correct optimal speed thrust but incorrect static thrust.
Let’s slow down, let’s say 700km/h
700 km/h and 6G U- Turn?
yes, according to the schedule, you should continue overclocking, but slower
It is practically at a standstill, unable to accelerate beyond 700 km/h at 6G. In fact, I think it decelerates unless I am slightly losing altitude.
let’s slightly raise the speed to 800 km/h
MiG-29 versus Mirage 2000: personal account from Air Marshal Harish Masand
In a turn towards the Mirage, I found we were crossing even 90 degrees before the Mirage. Also, I had noticed, while practicing for the displays, that the 29 accelerated even at 9g at low-levels if the power was ahead of the onset of g and, therefore, required a coordinated turn with power management to stay at the optimum speed and at the desired g.
At low fuel amounts (MiG-29 burns much faster) It is already possible to accelerate at 9G and to beat the Mirage 2000 in some turns, but it is hard to determine the performance from pilot accounts.
Passing 800 km/h it accelerates to 820 km/h in ~1 second at 6G, 2000m.
So there is a shortage of traction below 800km/h
Yes it seems so, it is also difficult to accelerate in regions 0 - 1000m in vertical even at speeds of 0.5 mach. This is hard to test, though… since you often exceed 1000m before finishing your pitch-up maneuver.
I have already written that the thrust is not calculated correctly. That’s why we have such a failure
Are you going to write to the devs on the Russian forum or make a report?
I wrote that there is a shortage of traction. Not an error closed
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/REhVqnRqta0v
This additional information has not been added / mentioned to him? You can PM him with the additional information showing the aircraft is lacking thrust in regions <750 km/h with our testing as proof.
Link them to this conversation in PM’s and explain the discrepancy with the testing in the manual.
It’s like standing in front of a wall and talking to her.
1 Like
I will work some magic I think, see what I can do.
1 Like
TrikZZter it’s a scourge of technical moderators
2 Likes
He is not so bad, it is just his job to deny these reports in lieu of new primary documents. It was not well explained in my opinion or at the very least, not well supported enough until now to show that there is indeed a discrepancy.
1 Like