I want the same pull or similar to the G because it is heavier on average that the SMT in RB anyway.
I fly the SMT with 30min internal and 4x72 and 2R27E variants that is well over 2,000lbs on the wings.
I makes sure I am under 18min before engaging in dogfights. I make sure the R27s are launched. The SMT still suffers unless 8mins or under.
The G with a 30 min and a drop tank 4x72 and 2R27E variants that is well over 2,000lbs on the wings can enter dogfights at 28 mins and still have R27s and not suffer to any significant degree like the SMT.
I have went out with 20min fuel because the RD-33 series II and still have to burn fuel off to get Mig29 performance.
Even this is not totally historical either that you must wait until fuel has burned under full for the Mig29.
Mikoyan intentionally designed the Mig29 to be allowed the perfect amount of capacity to be able cover the combat radius for the task at hand and can sit full and have no detrimental effect on the flight performance. The jet was not originally designed and put into service to fly way out to operation in a strategic theatre to conduct operations and fly the entire way back in the first place, because it was already designed to carry just the right amount of internal fuel and still be combat effective while retaining its high performance that was required as a quick reaction force unit on the frontline. A Point Defense Fighter.
The ranges at which we compete and engage each other are predominantly considered within visual range. The square miles it covers should technically and historically be ideal combat radiuses for the Mig29 and a literal home field advantage.
Because this specific platform, a Frontal Aviation asset was designed to take off from the very near the front similar to the ranges each base is currently set from each other in game and immediately be on top of an opponent before they ever knew it and can run, but is now too close do anything about it, due to the immense performance (Earliest in service product of the Fulcrum) because the thing practically came out the box with high off boresight capability and looking up IRST ACM mode scanned upward as default to take off flying very low and fast and detect & target without possibility of compromise.
Original Mig29 was already purposely designed not to have too much fuel but just enough with no extra fat which is a just minor extra pinch on the already over the top dogfight performance, It was not critical to the alpha capability and roll rate to such a degree as seen in the SMT. Had it been true, Mikoyan would have never developed the SMT if it meant a total loss of what the Fulcrum was designed for.
It is just a dumb idea giving the Fulcrum any combat radius would mean a total loss in its specialized dogfight purity for a role that any Flanker can beat anyway.
The true purpose of the modernization was to bring the Fulcrum’s specialized design in close quarters to any perceived strategic theatre outside the Soviet Union.
The Fulcrum’s design was so overly intended for the dogfight as upmost priority, that even landing back at your operating airfield was somewhere down the list and not a priority. That the technology in the airfoil of the Mig29 specifically serves to further over enhances the Mig29 to the point that it can be considered supermaneuverable. How many 4th generation fighters without TVC are considered supermaneuverable?
The lack of priority for the Mig29 in even making it back to original airfield should be remembered as another unique design we will never see again is it was of a Cold War mentality of the Soviet Union. Which bred remarkable fighters like the Mig29 for the frontal aviation point defense role. The F-16 was originally designed as a pure dogfighter as well, but it was fined tuned to maintain it’s size (which was a fighter mafia requirement)
that permanent expansion of any internal fuel tank would greatly degrade digitally aerodynamic design of the aircraft and require a messnew software upgrades aw well by General dynamics to regard the that which was already been precisely maximized. That is why the F-16s in game flies noticeably degraded with Sparrows even after launch and Aim-120s are placed on tips first. It is a perfected design but actually meant to fly very clean on the wings. That is the downside of FBW in that very little can be changed on the actual airframe. That is why the Israelis designed conformal fuel tanks as well.
Been looking into this Mig29 and SMT dilemma a lot lately. It is a dilemma because if we accept this SMT model as is over an irrelevant 2,000 pounds over the max power of the RD-33 engines and afterburning output that we are constantly using still puts the SMT at least over a 1.01:1 the lesser powered Flanker will suffer. It needs to be addressed now in the SMT.
I’m not gonna bother reading the wall of text after the first one you sent, it’s such a simple issue. The wall of text is totally unnecessary to get your point across.
The MiG-29SMT is not pulling less with instructor because it’s more limited, rather because it pulls less due to the change in weight and center of gravity. It’s just not as good as the MiG-29G. Expecting it to perform as well kinematically is just an unrealistic expectation. The issue you claim will affect the flanker is not a real issue.
I’ve test flown the MiG-29G and the MiG-29SMT fully upgraded, I’ve looked at the FM files. I know what I’m talking about and it’s based on tangible evidence. You need not play the game countless hours and matches every week just to earn the right to speak on the forum as you’ve insinuated in the past.
Though if that’s the requirement I’ve done nothing but exceed it.
I don’t think that’s really relevant to the topic, but in my defense I work a full time job and part of that job requires me to work long hours or be away from my computer for long periods of time. I’m not always able or willing to put hundreds of matches down a month. Not everyone working full time wants to come home and play the game. There’s nothing wrong with spending your free time doing other things, like sharing your knowledge or discussing REAL problems.
It’s not relevant to the discussion how much I play anyway, my opinions are based on something tangible and not emotional. You want the MiG-29 to be more than it is now… unfortunately for you it is performing as accurately as we can get it and there is little headroom to improve it further.
I’d appreciate it if you took a less hostile approach to conversation.
You are trying to say that the instructor is limiting the SMT more than the G. That’s something directly linked to the code, which is something we can directly look at.
There are 25 lines changed from the G to the SMT. This is related to the additional fuel tank & tank capacity, the 10kgf difference in thrust, and a 0.007 change in the drag coefficient “CdMin”.
The part of the file related to the instructor is identical.
Even though the amount of time spent in actual matches with the 9-12G or the 9-19 over the earlier models is irrelevant, the amount of matches I’ve flown in the 9-13 and 9-12 have given me sufficient knowledge of how well they play in the current meta (which has changed little). The addition of the R-73 gives them more potent weaponry and the additional weight to the SMT makes it less useful in a dogfight (it already loses to the F-16 in the 9-12 iterations). The meta is indifferent since last patch.
Is this your way of saying the G is not better than the SMT carrying R27ERs in a dogfight and more fuel?
It’s your only way because you havent really played either.
The instructor limits the capabilities of the Mig29 as a whole. You going to say it doesn’t? Stop trying to obscure because your feelings are hurt again.
When did you become a developer and all-knowing in what values can be touched that changes how any given model performs in game?
When did you become a developer? The moment you gained datamining tools? I am genuinely asking.
consider this if the 29G has more fuel it still could be lighter unless the 29G is like max fuel and the SMT is significantly lower some gap like that, please give specific fuel figures and I can tell you which is heavier or not actually
The instructor limits all aircraft on purpose so that they don’t bleed excessive speed in mouse aim. The devs have done this intentionally. Mirage 2000 players complained about it, and when I reported that it seemed excessively limiting to me they fixed it. If you want a similar change for the MiG-29, you can report it. No one is stopping you.
I have my own opinions, based on actual evidence AND my own personal experience and feelings when testing the aircraft. I’ve flown it in actual matches, I’ve done testing in test flight. It makes no difference. I know what I know, and it’s factual. I pointed out something you were wrong about, and I added my own opinion to further the conversation and you reply hatefully and disrespectfully. It’s not necessary.
You don’t need to be a developer to understand what is happening with the 9-12G over the 9-19 FM’s. The 9-19 is heavier, the center of gravity shifted unfavorably. It performs worse due to this. It has other advantages like the radar.
Do you dispute any of the facts I’m sharing? Do you think the SMT is being manipulated unfairly?
The SMT weight balance is different than the MiG-29G’s even if the total weight is less due to ordnance or fuel.
SMT is flying 18min fuel (no drop tank) armed with 4xR72
The G can fly 28mins (no drop tank) armed with 4xR72 and sometimes both R27ERs
The G is still significantly better in roll rate, turn rate, pitch, alpha and climb over the SMT
Which weighs more and by how much. Remember the #1 fuel tank is the spine of the Mig29. Its always filled first. The SMT on average has less fuel in the wings as well or should be historically. Roll rate should not be degraded as it is in game especially if flying with 20 or less.
the Mig29G has no regard for full fuel and should not because Mikoyan developed the aircraft to carry the max fuel and stay combat effective in dogfighting. thats why it also has a poor radius outside of what it was designed to do, point defense.
for simplification do you happen to have WTRTI or the client that reads out performance like AoA, turnrate, G pull, etc just to quantify the difference
also whats the max fuel time of the G before take off with full internal fuel I need that for calculation (I dont have German TT so I cannot check myself and 9-13 has more internal fuel)
if you could give specific performance differences it could numerically would be helpful
but anyways in the fuel times you gave the SMT is infact a few hundred kilos lighter, however* Im gonna have to point out when MiG-23M was talking about the code earlier he was right the FM code between the 9-19 and 9-12G are pretty much the same in terms of flight performance, only 10kgf more thrust (nonfactor because its so little) and SMT is very slightly more draggy.
So if the SMT is significantly lighter it shouldnt perform worse still, I understand you’re going off ingame experience but based off the way youve described it, I doubt it has been quanitified so if you could use WTRTI or a program like that to show differences in performance to prove (numerically) the SMT is performing worse then it’d be enough to convince me and I’d be happy to assist in putting together a bug report to fix the modelling error
The 9-12 and 9-13 do not have a spine fuel tank, the wing tanks raise a bit in the center to fill that area but it is mostly flight controls. The 9-19 has a spinal fuel tank. The radar is different. The center of gravity shift is likewise going to be greater.
Looking into it, appears the MiG-29SMT might require more drag to account for some of the additional surfaces like the refueling probe. They are quite large.
