Good luck on that, personally i’m just gonna sit back and let the professionals to do the job.
1 Like
SMT without humpback version would’ve been much better, although i dont know if that plane has access to same armament and FCS.
from what i could tell the SMT was the exact same when i was flying it in dev a few hours ago.
But idk if i will let go of the r27’s for a long while yet - the ER is still really handy for takin the first long range shots, like 40km+ where it has a massive energy advantage, and you still have plenty of time to evade any income fox3’s fired in retaliation. the new radar UI for datalink missiles makes sneaky INS shots with the ER even easier too which is cool.
And the ET, flankly i dont think i’ll ever drop - that things just immensely useful at all times.
So rn my SMT loadout is looking like 1x ET, 1x ER, 2x r77, 2x r73
we all are
That is one helluva cursed loadout.
Time to sleep then.
Well, it’s still modelled to be a bus even if I lower the fuel to 20 min internal.
Mig-29 performance does not come alive until 8 minutes. Its lame it should be higher imo. Thats what I have been trying to get the community to come to a consensus on.
The engines are massively powerful. The Mig-29 should be tossed around like a toy with that thrust to weight imo.
1 Like
Well hopefully Gaijin adds 9.15 with proper Fm and loadout, that thing will be beast compare to this bus.
2 Likes
lmao - im used to changing between missiles frequently tbh. I run mixed utility loadouts on most things where i can, and with migs i was running 1/1/4 since forever - adding in the extra r77’s not a big deal, and is nice cause frankly your not gonna be doing as much dogfighting to use up 4 r73’s with smt anyway so the extra 2 were just wasted space.
I tried that on SMT and it didnt worked out for me, surprisingly i’m used to switch between loadouts when i’m using Su-27, guess im weird.
Personally im gonna use 4 R-77+2 R-73 or 5 R-77+1 R-73 loadout on my SMT, it will be much better for my playstyle.
1 Like
well when i finish my Nx chart/SEP report, and if it goes through it should entirely fix the FM in that regard. Rn its fm doesnt even remotely match the chart according to the tests ive done so far
2 Likes
This has been my loadout for the SMT. Everyone is so paranoid about the ARHs. The ETs have been smacking dudes left & right.
Catching everyone slipping.
1 Like
gimme the full ET seeker performance - and the nato players are gonna be absolutely malding in chat. I love the ET so much already, and its going to be even better now with separation of flares & chaff, that much more unlikely someone will accidently flare them in bvr. But its soooo good in combination with fox3’s too. People start tryna defeat a r77 - and in the process give the seeker a great lock on their AB. And when they kinematically defeat the fox3, they dont realise the ET is still following with WAY more energy - then they recommit only to get slammed in the face without warning.
1 Like
For real. The IRCCM is much better than the R-73 it’s a more expensive missile with a complex seeker specially designed to hunt down Supersonic B1 Lancers at range even low popping tons of flares & emitting strong jamming.
1 Like
To be fair, pretty much every top tier IR missile ingame is majorly under-performing in the seeker department.
Some are ridiculous, it always makes me think when i play with cold war soviet jets if the r60s are really that sensitive
Dude, don’t even get me started on the seeker range performance. It is so weak, half the time you can’t even use the full envelope
Do you have an idea when you will be done with bug reports ? If you need anything or else, hit me up, I’d be glad to help in any way.
Thanks for helping improve the 29 !
1 Like
It will be at the earliest next week sometime, very busy until then. Getting accurate data with in game tests to apply to the longitudinal acceleration chart is a decent bit harder and more time consuming compared to just normal sustained rate testing - which is why i haven’t been able to pump it out yet.
1 Like
Would be interesting to look into. I know looking at dcs isn’t at all a source for anything, especially missiles since how the CM’s function in that are literally just pure rng. But r60’s are monumentally more reliable in DCS from what i’ve seen, able to withstand considerably more flares then in WT. If the historical sources actually did imply that the r60’s had such poor flare resistance, even with a rng based flare system it would still be easy to model the missile it to reflect the source at least somewhat accurately.
So would be interesting to have a look to try to find what sources DCS used for reference, cause there is a massive discrepancy. It could very well be that the r60’s we have in game rn are just incidentally carrying on deliberately imposed nerfs from way back when they were first implemented, and never got readjusted back up to their full performance (like magic’s have) to match the current capabilities of the competition. Or it could also be that they are actually just trash lol - who knows.
1 Like
