It does not really say that explicitly, but if you look at it, the first 3 bullet points are about airborne targets, the rest are about ground targets. So in the very least we can’t be certain that the 15 km/h figure applies to air targets.
Also, there is another pdf about the MiG-29 (called MiG-29 pocket guide or something like that) that I can’t post here, but it had much higher notch windows for air targets (minimum of around 150 km/h).
Well, this document is divided by independent blocks of info, for example above the block with velocity you see block with the terrain mapping characteristics and it is not an A-G mode iirc, it is a terrain mapping mode.
Is it for Zhuk-M or for N019 radar?
Zhuk-ME
Can anyone check if the MiG-29N still has the N019E or has it been replaced by the N019ME and if it still has the RVV-AEs?
Now they just gotta copy it over to a 9.13 model and rename the radar to N019M and folder the plane under the SMT and call it MiG-29S
slightly less painful to play. Still worse than the SMT though
All MiG-29’s RD-33 Are Severely Underperforming Thrust
"For standard day/sea level conditions the approximate static thrust ratings are as follows:
G/GT: NPM (Normal power mode) Maximum AB thrust: 8,300kp"
Source: GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 Pages, 1-2 (MiG-29G/GT FLIGHT Manual)
These are not raw thrust values from the aircraft manufacturer’s engine vendor as it makes no logical sense to do without specifically stating so in the flight manual. To carelessly place only uninstalled thrust would kill many pilots at take-off operating under a multitude of varying gross weights/payloads during ground operations such as take-off. That is why static thrust @ sea, standard day serves as the universal certified baseline that is guaranteed by the aircraft manufacturer. This is to ensure that aircrews do not perish in a ball of flames at the end of the runway, of course.
Please note how in GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29 the engines are described being equipped variable geometry intakes giving the reader a hint that the thrust ratings that follow are regarding installed thrust.
The Definition of Static Thrust At Sea level, Standard day
“Take-off thrust is commonly considered to be the static thrust quoted by the manufacturer. The static thrust is the thrust measured with the engine stationary, as would be the case when the aircraft is initiating the take-off roll.”
“Note that the take-off thrust is usually taken to mean the sea-level static thrust and is equal to the gross thrust at sea level…”
“This relation is reasonably accurate up to Mo=0.3. Note that the take-off thrust Fto is usually taken to mean the sea-level static thrust (Vo=0) and is equal to the gross thrust at sea level. The take-off thrust determines the take-off characteristics of an aircraft.”
Source: Theory of Aerospace Propulsion 1st Edition - Pasquale M. Sforza Pages 395-396 & Theory of Aerospace Propulsion 2nd Edition Pasquale M. Sforza Page 475.
All installation losses imposed by the air vehicle have already been mathematically corrected and adjusted with correction factors applied by the aircraft manufacturer to represent operational use. This is regulated and certificated in airworthiness trials. There is no such thing as “channel loss” in aerospace propulsion engineering or in airworthiness certification. I suppose the Gaijin was attempting to refer to duct loss or air inlet distortion, which would still be covered under installation loss whichever is the case.
To verify aerospace propulsion engineering textbooks, international civil & military industry standards all one needs to do is simply calculate the aircraft’s thrust to weight ratio (TWR) using the operational manual’s static thrust @ sea level, standard day & gross weight.
The MiG-29 Product Index 9.12 (VVS) Thrust-to-Weight Ratio ≈ 1.14
"When the engines are operating in the “Full afterburner mode during takeoff. (H=O, V=0), the thrust-to-weight ratio of the aircraft is 1.14.”
Source: ПРАКТИЧЕСКАЯ АЭРОДИНАМИКА САМОЛЕТА МИГ-29 Страница 179 (PRACTICAL AERODYNAMICS OF THE MIG-29 AIRCRAFT Page 179)
The MiG-29 Product Index 9-12G Thrust-to-Weight Ratio ≈ Greater than 1
“Normally, the thrust-to-weight ratio is greater than 1 (depending on the aircraft load and configuration). It enables high velocities, high rates of acceleration and high turn rates.”
Source: (MiG-29G/T Manual) GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 Pages, 1-4 Change 4
Thrust to weight ratio is determined by take-off thrust (static thrust @ sea, standard day) & gross weight (operating weight & full internal fuel). Take-off thrust is critical in determining baseline flight characteristics.
Using product index 9.12G’s gross weight from the manual:
Index 9.12G Gross Weight = 14,454 kg
RD-33’s Static Thrust @ Sea, Standard day (take-off thrust) = 8,300kgf × 2 = 16,600kgf
Index 9.12G Gross Weight = 14,454 kg
RD-33’s Static Thrust @ Sea, Standard day (take-off thrust) = 8,300kgf × 2 = 16,600kgf
Thrust-to-Weight Ratio (TWR)
Take-off Thrust / Gross Weight = 16,600kgf / 14,454 kg ≈ 1.15
This aligns with both operational/flight manuals of the Soviet (VVS) MiG-29 Index 9.12 & the Luftwaffe (NATO) 9.12G.
The 8,300kgf thrust rating of the RD-33 is 100% installed thrust.
That 0.01 difference is not a performance distinction in reality. it’s simply a reflection of how manuals round gross weight figures. The MiG‑29 product index 9.12G was essentially the same aircraft, but NATO documentation may have used slightly different baseline weights (MiG MAPO carried out the update to NATO standard using different avionics, equipment, measurement standards etc.).
Now, please refer to the take-off thrust of the MiG-29G in-game at this very moment & calculate TWR using the aircraft gross weight (operating weight & full internal fuel).
Each RD-33 is underpowered at take-off @ 6,787kgf for each RD-33.
6,787 kgf x 2 = 13,574 kgf
The thrust-to-Weight Ratio (TWR) of the War Thunder MiG-29 product index 9.12G:
Take-off Thrust / Gross Weight = 13,574 kgf / 14,454 kg ≈ 0.94
All MiG-29 in-game are severely underpowered the moment they spawn on the runway & since take-off thrust determines overall flight characteristics thus setting the baseline for an aircraft’s entire performance envelope directly governing acceleration, climb rate, turn capability, and maneuvering limits, it is inappropriate for us to state that these aircraft are performing anywhere near a historical reality.
MiG-29 9-12G (All MiG-29) Severe Lack of Operational Thrust // Gaijin.net // Issues
Lol now we are not allowed to calculate thrust to weight! Or any calculations I should say. Lol…
I don’t understand why you think the values for the engines in the manuals are installed just, most of the time they are for uninstalled thrust as the bug report manager said
Do the math kid.
Besides textbook definition of static thrust at sea level or comprehend that all aircraft and their engines regulated by the FAA, DoD and ICAO. The MiG-29 is ICAO compliant. You have zero idea what I am talking about, but its ok. Engines and aircraft are all certified to fly in what is call Airworthiness certification. They cannot fly without meeting these requirements.
Lol what logical reason you think it would be the uninstalled thrust?! For real my guy. Yeah, let me just take-off with my aircrew and passengers under any given gross weight not knowing what the installed thrust at take-off is whatsoever so we can all end up dying in a ditch at the end of the runway.
But anyway, do the math
What is the thrust to weight ratio of the MiG-29? You have all the manuals don’t you?
Then tell me the gross weight. You can simply verify any fighter jet by taking the stated thrust in the manual, its gross weight and calculating its TWR to see if it matches up.
You can calculate the MiG-29 TWR in-game right now. Its .94… Is that historical?
What installed thrust would equal 1:1 in the Mig-29 in your mind??
There is only a small window…
8,300kgf…
Do you think the rd-33 is going to have the same installed thrust in all planes?
I am glad you walked into this.
The Soviet’s ALWAYS produced corrected (installed) thrust ratings in all their fighters, even when discussing the engines in isolation because these engines were designed first and foremost for the aircraft in question. The Soviets tended to simplify what information they provided directly to the pilot, even prioritizing data they believed was immediately relevant during flight. Their design philosophy often meant that parameters considered “maintenance concerns” were not burdened upon the pilot with visible instrumentation & especially within the FLIGHT manual in which he must trust his life.
This is all installed thrust as the RD-33 was designed first and foremost for the Mig-29
Again, what is the thrust to weight ratio of the MiG-29 my guy, can you answer that?
What installed thrust is needed to meet that thrust to weight?
hey guys has anyone looked at the acceleration? plane maybe has too much thrust overperforms a bit and this is on the draggier 9-13 too… maybe devs should nerf thrust i think
Increasing thrust and drag maybe
Gaijin does not even follow their own logic. They model how they feel nothing more nothing less
I have all the same sources you do.
Uninstalled bench thrust my ass. They gave the MiG-21Bis & Bison all of its stated thrust you say is all uninstalled, emergency AND some on top! They are playing you like a fiddle.
well it performs fairly well below wave drag region so im not sure about increasing drag since thatd impact that’s accuracy… thrust decrease seems most straightforward here
Yeah because the mig-21bis is overperforming in thrust.
The point is these people have zero principle. They will buff and nerf with zero regard. They are solely interested in regurgitating, recycling content and spoon feeding it to you every business quarter.
Regardless of if you still cannot tell me what installed thrust is required to equal a 1:1 thrust to weight ratio in the MiG-29. I still care about you Chief.
Hint:
its around 8,300kgf…
The empty weight of the plane 11,010 kilograms.
So each engine only needs 5005kg thrust to equal 1:1 thrust to weight ratio.
Thats not gross weight that is empty weight.
Thrust to weight is not determined by empty weight lol.
Thrust to weight is determined by take-off thrust, operating weight & full internal fuel.
That is not even how combat thrust to weight is determined operating weight & two air to air missiles.
