Seems like there’s a good reason why the mig-29 doesn’t get its 7200 kgf.
Makes sense to me.
Source:
The first part makes total sense - the second one doesnt tho.
Yes ofc. 7800kgf wouldnt be achieved at all while the Intakes are blocked.
The problem is that the thrust in Warthunder doesnt change at all - which would mean according to gaijin thrust stays same no matter if the intakes are closed or not.
The second phenomena described is completly irrelevant for this discussion tho.
Gaijin doesnt (or barely) models engine stalling or differential intake flow.
Otherwise tons of planes ingame would greatly suffer from lacking thrust, including F16s, SU-27s, F15s and ESPECIALLY F18s and F14s.
the non-comform mixing of airflow of the intakes also only accours during high AOA while the “gills” open.
So this phenomena happening in straight flight is pure absurdity - especially because gaijin already modelled a thrust reduction at high AOAs for the MiG-29s
20% Effeciency loss is just unrealistic. Most planes face 5-7%, upmost being up to the 13% mark.
The MiG-29 would have an intake loss of roughly 22% in level flight at 0km/h - wich is completly off the board and unheardoff in the aviation industry.
22% thrust loss would be reasonable to assume while the Intakes are closed - but since gaijin doesnt model non-linear intake airflow there is no reason for any kind of Thrust reduction because of that - especially not permanent
3 Likes
I also debunked parts of this before
Section 3.6.1 specifically states that the charts 3.16 and 3.17 are WITH intake losses
Spoiler
Here with translate:
As you can see Section 3.6.1 even talks about how the incomplete gas expansion mentioned by your source are already included.
4 Likes
just to strenghten my point of 22% being WAY to much Channeloss.
(sorry for the wall of text)
Even if we take a rough 13% - Thrustloss you could experience on Starfighters, MiG-21s and M2Ks - you`ll still get a whopping 7200kgf.
for 6800kgf to be remotely true the MiG-29 Intakes would need to be twice as ineffecient as a Starfighter.
TWICE AS INEFFECIENT.
Just let that sink in for a solid minute - one of the shittiest intakes of the 3rd gens is supposed to be twice as good as the MiG-29s simple straight intake design?
2 Likes
Would the mig-29m (156) get the same irst as the mig-29smt
afaik the SMT uses the OLS-29M in the Zhuk-10M assembly
Im gonna assume you mean a MiG-29 9.15M?
Those use the OLS-M on the Zhuk-10 assembly, wich is the same IRST as on the 29K and YAK-141
If you mean the MiG-29 9.61M they use the OLS-UE with the Zhuk-10AE or the standart PESA models
Thats the same as on the MiG-35s.
The SMT in Warthunder might spark a lot of confusion as Gaijin gave the MiG-29SMT the Zhuk-10 Assembly instead of the Zhuk-10M
I dont know why this decision was made - as only SMT prototypes were equipped with the older radars/irsts.
Coming back to the question:
The SMT has a better IRST/Radar than the MiG-29 9.15M - but a MUCH worse than the MiG-29 9.61M
1 Like
Yeah i mean 9-15 or whatever the mig29m prototype 156 was. So its gonna have the garbage ±30 degrees azimuth instead of the nice 90 on the smt… unfortunate
Essentially a copy paste YAK-141 IRST
Im not shure if its modelled correctly but it should be still a lot superior to the 29As IRST
Also yeah russian naming schemes arent really smart lol.
The MiG-29 9.15 is the “MiG-29S” but the MiG-29 9.15M is the "MiG-29M)
(the 29 9.61M is the “MiG-29M.2” if youve read that before - the “MiG-29M2” is the two seater version of the MiG-29 9.15M)
I think you´re referring to the MiG-29 9.15M “156” wich was the first of its kind - the first MiG-29M
I thought the MiG-29M 9.15’s N010 Zhuk had +/- 90 degrees for the azimuth, like the SMT’s radar
I was talking about irst, not the radar. radar of both should be essentially the same, also its ±85 degrees.
Spoiler
Ohhh ty for the clarification:D
Aside the obvious lack thereof thrust, there is also lack of acceleration which has been reported and subsequently flown under the radar for some time.
1 Like
same thing happens on F14 im pretty sure i just cant find numbers for it
yeah found them this is tomcat in game it seems
“I did calculations the Channel loss is 25.3% 3,470 KGF is loss in game right now i dont think Channel loss is that high since F14 engine inlet is a straight shot”
i think its a shadow nerf or something they do to planes
As ive already said:
The uneven mixing of air would only happen when the “gills” (upper intakes) are opens - wich only happens on Ground or at high AOA.
Meanwhile the F14s uper intake openings are always open wich would explain why it has this phenomena modelled.
the MiG-29s shouldnt have this presn
5 Likes
intakes move for better flow at certain speeds
the pre-compression through the intake doors only accours at speeds exceeding Mach 1
And as you mightve noticed - thats for engine effeciency and wont introduce ineffeciencies.
(or differential airflow for that matter - the topic this is about)
25% seems excessive