I believe it’s on the old forum, gist of his statement was that my reports were being disregarded despite clear evidence to the contrary and the many changes I’ve helped report and get things fixed.
In which case, you would need only to look at the reports in question: Community Bug Reporting System
For those not familiar with the CBR
Means forwarded (accepted) for review.
2 Likes
There is also an advanced MiG-29SMT (9-20) in India-the local name of the MiG-29UPG (the second stage of modernization with an extension of service life until 2037 has been announced) …
It can be given to England as before by the T-90S…
1 Like
I hope gaijin focus add new 2 MiG-29 at 12.7 BR airframe lighter MiG-29SMT and located fill gap between MiG-29 (9-13) & MiG-29SMT (9-19), and 3 MiG-29 13.0 BR for russian before other country
There are far too many variants for them to not add more variations in the future.
What variants could we see in the future that would be overall improvements too the SMT? Besides the Mig-35 that is
I hope India get own TT, and JB don’t no one IAF plane
1 Like
It’s true MiG-29K (9-41) and MiG-29M2 (9-67) gajin not consider add to USSR/Russia tech tree 4 or 5 years and too far
I guess gajin might consider buff MiG-29SMT (9-19) add active radar homing BVRAAM R-77 replacement R-27R & R-27T this year, and R-27ER & R-27ET replace by R-27EA in Q4 2025 or Q3 2026
2 new MiG-29 filling gap between MiG-29 (9-13) & MiG-29SMT (9-19) might be MiG-29S (9-13S) & MiG-29SMT (9-17) or MiG-29SM (9-13SM), I think 2 MiG-29 could be 12.7 BR
I think China could get Bangladeshi MiG 29B(upgraded to BM standard) in the future.I know many of us dont want a MiG 29 in Chinese tree.
I’m just waiting for any variant that is light like the 9.12 or the 9.13 and that can carry r73s, mig29m would be the best tho
That’s the Mig-29G
You mean the ones in-game that are being hampered / limited already…
I’m telling you, an 11.7 or 12.0 MiG-23MLD with R-73s and moving the 9-13 up to 12.3 with R-73s would have solved these issues. I guess Germanys initial MiG-29 is stuck where it’s at thanks to the addition of the G model.
3 Likes
i agree but i don’t think gaijin will add archers to the 9.13, i’d love if they do, but they’d most likely spam a lot of variants with minor differences to justify researching an entire new vehicle. Without a question the best solution would be what you said.
As modelled, it’s like if they added the F-4E w/ AIM-9Ms and AIM-7Ds. Regardless of what they ultimately do, the current implementation is counterintuitive and frankly awful, leaving all parties on all spectrums upset. I genuinely can’t think of anyone who plays or faces the MiG-29 who is happy about the armament, it pisses everyone involved off it’s actually kind of impressive
MiG-29M2(9-47S) not 9-67
The main problem of the MiG-29 in the game is the low thrust of the engine
Mig-29M would be the best to go against later F-15s, unironically.
Engines from Mig-29K, 2 additional AAM pylons, and still has added fuel.
@BBCRF
Eh… over 16,000kgf combined above 800kph.
For the aircraft that isn’t SMT, that’s above 1:1.
H =0, M= 0, should be higher than now in the game
If the doors were open I’d agree, but those doors don’t open until just before takeoff speed [between 250 & 300kph IAS].
Even when the doors are open, the thrust is still lower than the real one