which ones? the engine? they usually do not release patches on weekends unless it is emergency fix
that and the flaps change
i wish they would, but prob after monday
1 Like
sad
1 Like
there you go again with your unclear answers to mask your incompetency in understanding technologies applied.
Probably why none of your reports ever get implemented and always disregarded by developers.
You continue to prove that you have NO CLUE about the Mig 29 because the airframe itself has an integral aerodynamic layout that generates 40% of lift alone that directly enhances turn radius and rate. This technology is found in aircraft of the 4th Generation and beyond. It is another technology the JH-7A lacks and still magically has turn rates & radiuses comparable to the Mig29 SMT in which YOU provided as proof by mistake.
Stop pinging me, you have nothing of value to give me.
@MiG_23M do you know what the differences are in the game for large caliber flares they added to SMT compared to regular caliber flares? Are there differences in the files?
Also, did the IRST on SMT or IRST in general have some kind of CM rejection capability İRL? I find it funny how the IRST lock gets flared easier than the R-73 so i usually have to use radar to maintain lock in dogfights lol
The engine probably not, the flapPolar stuff, yes…
Wrong again, bad bait btw
I’ve gotten direct responses on most of them, and nearly all of them warranted a change whether they were marked “not a bug” or “fixed”.
So does the Yak-15 have these technologies? How come it out-rates the MiG-29?
Outside the scope of my direct knowledge but I can check the differences in the files tomorrow when I’m next available.
1 Like
Lol.
This answer is the equivalent of “I failed to change the game in every single report I have ever made, but at least they acknowledged me.”
Its far lighter and smaller and as a result is has a smaller turn radius.
That is the only factor genius. How is someone so good at 1v1s, but so unable to understand that?
nice
No, each report made a change. The devs have also acknowledged the issues and stated they will be correcting the F-16 (as an example) further as they improve their instructor and flight model.
BFM has little to do with aerodynamic design…
The F-5E is smaller and lighter than the MiG-29, has some of the technologies you mentioned… and a better T/W than the Yak-15. Why doesn’t the F-5E out-rate the MiG-29 then?
2 Likes
Is irst even supposed to give gun lead(and closure rate)? without slaving the radar that is
The İRST on MİG-23 doesn’t show distance but the one on Mig-29 can show distance so I’m guessing it should do so. So GAIJIN deliberately made 29s İRST able to do those , so I’m guessing they did research about it
I’m making an uneducated guess but maybe it is using the radar at the same time to calculate such data? Or maybe it is like a constant laser range finder like on the tanks? But working constantly to measure distance and closure?
Yeah it’s weird to me as well. If it slaves the radar logically it would give a warning. I don’t think the IRST is like a modern thermal imager that is found on some spaa
BFM has many things to do with aerodynamic design of combat aircraft of the 4th Generation. But ok…
The Yak-15 is still far lighter than the F5E be several thousand pounds with a radar in the nose. The F-5E is also designed to fly and operate at supersonic and transonic flight and does not have the straight wings more suitable for turn radius at subsonic speeds.
The F5E does not have the size, lift properties of the Mig29 and enough thrust can be generated to make use out of its own LERX. Which is the first fighter and predecessor of the technology.
Additionally, the F5E is modelled rather poorly but I digress.
Are you done asking questions that only serve in providing more evidence that you really do not know what you are talking about?
İt might be using radar like TWS tho I have no clue. Or it might have something like a constant laser range finder or something similar.
Tho I’m just making speculation based on my very limited (not) understanding. But finding data on such niche things is difficult especially if you do not know where to look and I do not unfortunately.
1 Like
The MiG-29’s IRST has a laser that is used to determine distance.
1 Like
The basic fighter maneuvers were a thing prior to gen4s. The fighters capabilities and the modern meta of HOBS missiles dictate which ones are most useful for them these days, but they have nothing to do with aerodynamic design.
Does it not? You know exactly how much lift it makes and it’s related to the LERX and nothing else? You almost touched on what I’ve been getting at this entire time. The JH-7A wing design is not the same as the MiG-29s.
No, are you gonna provide a basis for anything you claimed earlier? Such as;
JH-7A performing better than a MiG-29
JH-7A having bettera AoA than MiG-29
JH-7A overperforming
MiG-29SMT underperforming, and how?
(My questions are only trying to further discussion and get you to present your lack thereof an argument).
2 Likes
Who said that it was not? The rest of your answer and whatever sense you think you made is still irrelevant.
BFM is a huge aspect of aerodynamic design in 4th Generation fighters and fighter aircraft in general.
Not so much of the 3rd generation with many designs such as the F-104 and Mig25. Both designed to be purely interceptors. Fast interceptors was the dominant trend of the 3rd generation.
We got a real sherlock holmes over here.
Why? You are irrelevant and a waste of time. You going to submit the report if I provide irrefutable evidence the SMT is underperforming? You are a failure of a bug reporter with no wins.
None of your test are accepted by developers so anything you have to say about them is IRRELEVANT to me. Smin himself made it a point and directly told you on behalf of the developers before closing your own reports!! So how is your claim that the JH-7A is not rooted irrelevant falsities? Because you tested it?! Lol