@sudo_su1 Did you ever report Mig-29SMT’s radar.
how so?
whats wrong with it?
He made a report on its ACM radar mode being slewable, other than that idk
How isn’t it
Spoiler
Missing ACM mode
Missing air to ground modes
Should provide intercept data for up to 4 targets
Ability to track 2 targets in air to ground modes
Missing synthetic aperture
Missing raid mode
Incorrect search zone
Incorrect radar model
Incorrect radar range in HPRF
Incorrect radar range in MPRF
Incorrect radar elevation
8 Likes
Missing PDV mode:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/9FZpEygOgE82
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/xumnJSiRTxwM
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/a2vQRCKiiS8g
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/RUx6kICKfGLH
Unless I’m missing something it’s already 4.
It does show you the 'predicted position / path of the missile" for 6, but the datalink guidance is limited to 4.
Doesn’t directly translate to anything in the game at the moment AFAIK
Can’t seem to find it in the brochures
The RWS modes seem to match the ±10/30/60 deg
Not sure if they had a source for the ±20/40 deg for TWS modes or if they just pulled it out of thin air
Perhaps you can give it a try and see what they say …
Good find
Should be +56 instead of the current +60
Gonna make a report myself if you don’t mind, as I have three other sources on hand to supplement it
Good find
Seems to be missing a little in range
1 Like
MiG-29SMT Zhuk-M radar range too low:
https://community.gaijin.net/issues/p/warthunder/i/PJnijUdkgENo
1 Like
Trust and believe ong
3 Likes
Yep tests against that chart show a very large underperformance at lower speeds and a bit of a over performance at high speeds. Only trouble with it is it doesn’t list a specific weight, but one would assume its for the same 13000 mass as the proceeding charts in the section, and throughout the rest of the manual. I did want to do tests at even lower fuel loads even down to 0% before i reported on it just to give no wiggle room, but never got around to doing it unfortunately - tho i suspect it would continue underperforming even at low fuel loads. Thats my testing i did for reference in case u hadnt seen it, i know it got thrown around a while ago tho so maybe u have already;
I guess since someone has reported with that chart now, maybe no harm in throwing that in there if u wanted haha. Tests at 13000 mass with clean wings at 2k alt and i believe margins were (±100m alt), ±0.1g, ±5m climb rate with vast majority datapoints up to 6g an average of at least 3 separate SEP readings. Just bear in mind however, that was before they added the AoA button and tweaked some stuff with a bunch of jets, tho i can’t imagine it would affect the SEP much since those were mostly to do with stability stuff at high AoA if i remember correctly.
5 Likes
No, it isn’t. It’s an R-27ER.
Anyone seen North Korea is equipping their MiG-29s with PL-11 and PL-12?
Still don’t understand why russia have the heaviest variants of the MiG-29 (9-13 is roughly 175kg heavier than 9-12 and the SMT is well, and SMT). The 9-13 in game doesn’t have the benefits of the 9-13 irl (ECM and correct me if I’m wrong, the ability to use the 27ER) I think USSR should recieve a 9-12 as ECM is probably not in the game developers minds at the current time. Dev server FM, remove 27ER from every 29 (unless 9-13 did use them), give them R-73s instead of R-60Ms
7 Likes
An opinion widely shared since the addition of the plane and yet it offers the company no money to do so unless it is a premium.
4 Likes
9.13S used them. Not 9.13 if I am not mistaken.
Russia has the 9-13 instead of the 9-12 because that is the variant they widely used
The initial Mig29 models were not able to carry the 27er, the biggest reason why is that the mig-29 entered service before the 27er and that the 27er was primarily used on the Su27 instead, ontop of that they needed an avionics upgrade Iirc.
1 Like
9.13S was the modernised variant fitted with R77s I believe
yes but it was also able to use the r-27er after it was modernised
1 Like
