Your testing has no competitive value and is nothing more special than the next man who does not play the game as it is designed such as yourself but sits on the forum talking about it.
You absolutely cannot perform in it. Because I know you lack the patience from my personal experience and also from my actual experience in this new meta.
Your stats in the SMT also reflect that.
One game at the beginning of the SMTs release killing 7 players that barely reacted to your existence and never committed to you is not valid argument that you now know the SMT over the players who play it now in this meta for hundreds upon hundreds of games.
Your stats in every aircraft to come in the last two patches reflect your inability (which is patience) to even play in the meta more than 20 games without rage quitting. The reason being is that this meta has changed quite drastically and these days it is quite easy to get killed by the lowest of skilled players far worse than when the F16 and Mig2 platform first appeared in the game.
If ziggy is saying that the mig 29smt with min fuel is performing worse than the mig29g fully loaded, isn’t it worth doing some tests to confirm this? I don’t agree with everything he says but this seems really strange, if the smt with min fuel and no weapons is loosing to the mig29g with full combat loads, that doesnt seem right
He’s malding that his top tier Russian fighter is worse than the German one in A2A; a trend that continues to get worse as the 29s get heavier with multirole capabilities.
I do not want it to be exaggerated, but more like 20min fuel for SMT armed with 2xR73s and no weapons is where I tested 1v1s against the G with full fuel flying with 4xR73s and 2x R27s.
That makes up for the SMTs weight of upgrades and extra as well as the enhanced drag of those weapons.
The Mig29G still performs substantially better and is not limited in alpha like the SMT is.
Min fuel no weapons the SMT performs as it should but should as well at 20 min. The SMT loses performance the second any fuel is given outside of minimum setting.
The change in center of gravity drastically effects the high alpha capacity of the aircraft. You can test this in Kerbal Space Program by making an aircraft with a fuel tank in the front and the rear… make it aerodynamically stable… but maneuverable.
Then, move the center of gravity around with the fuel loadings in front or rear… you’ll see that the aircraft that moves the weight further from the center of lift becomes more stable and has worse nose authority and maneuverability… couple that with being heavier from the get-go and having higher drag…
I am not certain that this is the cause of it, maybe it is over-exaggerated. I have not done that testing. If you’d share proofs we can discuss more in-depth but your word doesn’t warrant a report. I am not free for testing and such at the moment, or for the following few weeks pending unforeseen free time.
Again, If so, I I refer you to the JH-7A once again.
The JH-7A has an absurdly long heavy nose and fuselage the wings the nose is so long that the wings sit on 65% back end of the aircraft. Yet it has better performance in any fuel setting over the 4th generation SMT being heavier by 8,000lbs over the SMT with far less thrust to weight.
the Xi’an JH-7A Not having a single one of these technologies in 4th generation wing and fuselage design like that of the mig29 with a vastly inferior thrust to weight still able to generate more lift, higher angles of attack and sustain turns at those higher angles of attack for a longer period in a smaller turn radius over the SMT?
The JH-7A weighed 31,086lbs empty made up of composite materials.
The SMT is 26,6204 empty after upgrades.
What AoA the JH-7A is pulling right now? Could very well be the JH-7A over performing.
Also in general the best way to look at this stuff is polar diagrams.
Again, I’ve seen nothing to suggest this is true. I don’t know why it’s being brought up in the MiG-29 thread.
The original comparison was the MiG-29G vs the SMT, you’re taking the heaviest and lightest models and making comparisons… not comparing it to an aircraft of entirely different design.
You think the SMT is performing as expected? What about compared to the new JH-7A?
The Mig29 equipped with one of the iconic 4th generation enhancements such as the very large leading edge root extensions (LERX) that extend up the wing root up fuselage to almost the nose of the aircraft. The Mig29s are actually curved and cambered. LERX directs large amounts of airflow over the wing and fuselage at a very highspeed. The vortices generated here will not separate from the wing and fuselage easily and will stay attached to the wing well past the point stall/boundary separation greatly increasing sustained turn rate at high angles of attack without suffering any loss to lift. Mig and Su would be incapable of the supermaneuvrability without it.
The Mig29 is further enhanced being designed with an integral aerodynamic layout, where the fuselage is creates up to 40% of the total lifting force. All 5th generation fighters are designed with this layout as foundation.
The Mig29 is also actually a very decently light fighter weighing in empty at 24,000lbs/10886? With a thrust to weight of 1.09:1 right? Insanely powerful.
So, my question to you, why does the Xi’an JH-7A not having a single one of these technologies in 4th generation wing and fuselage design with a vastly inferior thrust to weight still able to generate more lift, higher angles of attack and sustain turns at those higher angles of attack for a longer period in a smaller turn radius over the SMT?
Because of weight??
The JH-7A’s is extensively made up of many types of composite materials, I find that it is true. However, the JH-7A empty weight was only reduced by 881lbs and the only noticeable effect was stated to be maximum takeoff weight increased by 10%, and the range increased, nothing more.
The JH-7A weighed 31,086lbs empty made up of composite materials.
The SMT is 26,6204 empty after upgrades.
So why is the SMT quite literally struggling to stay in the air being the much lighter, smaller aircraft and having the superior wing and fuselage design as well as vastly superior thrust to weight over everything that the JH-7 pretends to be?
Why aren’t the F-16 reporters freaking out over such a UFO? while its greatly heavier doing everything the SMT should do but cannot?
You’re copy pasting the same thing you said two days ago now?
The one where I replied the same way and got no answer?
I’ve taking a look at the JH-7A and it doesn’t have nearly the high alpha capacity of the SMT… and I very highly doubt the sustained turn rate is better as you say. It has high stability, indicative of a design with such a rear-ward center of lift.
You never played the aircraft are making up things because you cannot comprehend the combined technologies of the Mig29 and the lack of them in the heavier JH7A.