I would like to generate results that reflect the average combat scenario each fighter enters a dogfight in Realistic Battles.
To be fair to the G I gave it the same fuel time of 15min (though it is much higher when it sees a dogfight around 25 min) and 4x73s because most of the time the R27s have been launched before entering a dogfight on average in RB.
Or 20min each 4x R73s to make it easy. I can imagine the G not beating the SMT
Also how much alpha were we pulling in the turn test? Are both pulling the same degree? one not higher than the other? One is reported to pull greater alpha and pulling too much will reduce the overall rate.
You stated one heavier than the other, I did that, going for specific fuel numbers (min, 20min, 30min, etc) where one is heavier than the other is much easier to test since fuel mass is constant and testing doesnt have to be done in specific windows to remain consistent
Also clean is intentional for drag to remain the same, the point clearly being the SMT does infact perform better when it is lighter
This cannot be reasonably done for a comparison since R-73s would be more draggy than R-60s
also 15 mins fuel vs 12min fuel is not a big difference and the result will be the same provided the other aircraft is heavier
29 9-13 is fully spaded on an expert crew
29 9-19 has all performance modifications (I only have bombs not researched) also on an expert crew
anyways if you insist 15 mins of fuel with 4 R-73 I can try to accommodate (just know its difficult to test in test flight since the plane is only at 15 min fuel for 1 turn) but if I where to test this the MiG-29 9-13 would have R-60s instead which are less draggy than R-73s
None of these fighter’s face opponents in these conditions though Draco.
Yes, the SMT performs great when its light and clean. Did not think it performs significantly better. Thanks, we learned something.
I will go with the expert crew, but I am Aced in both and crews differ depending on the aircraft and we cannot rule out all possibility that one may have some greater values set than the other just because they are Mig29s but of differing nations unless mig can see those values as well. @MiG_23M Can you?
Thats why the only way to find out what is the cause of Ziggy’s great distress is to simulate the condition each of the fighters are in during a game scenario (first dogfight contact) and compare the two and perhaps we find somewhere it has a greater induced drag or compression or that specific fuel times, weapons in combination of the values mig showed are the cause.
Or yes, the possibility we determine Ziggy is just imagining the whole thing, though many people feel its underperforming in same areas, and we cannot hallucinate the same thing.
I’ve already stated all MiG-29s share the same FM with only small changes to the aforementioned values.
What would have been much better for us is if you went into battle and recorded these situations for comparison or gave us proof of a real discrepancy.
We have, ordnance doesn’t effect CoG, only weight. There’s a specific line for it in the code. We know that when one has less weight it performs better. This constant applies across the board for MiG-29s since they all have, for the most part, the same FM. @DracoMindC has already shown you what we need to see to determine your personal feelings about the aircraft underperforming in comparison are just wrong.
@Ziggy1989 did testing with missiles like requested as expected performance gap narrowed a lot but also so did the weight gap (R-73s are a lot heavier than R-60s :P)
new results are with 9-13 at 13533kg, and 9-19 at 13381kg only a 152kg difference now
noted performance differences, the SMT has .2 degrees AoA less at high speed, but also has better energy retention at that speed as a result
SMT performs slightly better in turnrate at both tested speeds tho the gap is much closer now since the weight gap is also closer
overall beyond the .2 more AoA (which was probably the same in the original test WTRTI was rounding back then for some reason) at high speed the results were expected
I already laid out the aircraft performs like a mig29 at really low fuel times with weapons, of course it’s going to do even better clean and min fuel. I never even flown the thing clean like ever. That is not the report I made to you Mr. Bug Reporter.
Hoops? When you conduct a scientific study, and a simulation to find a reported issue is called for. You simulate the environment and conditions to the letter and attempt to best match that which was reported to you, after you can begin to rule out possibilities.
When I specifically said obtaining mig29 performance is not the problem, but the fuel times in which they appear are the issue in RB armed with weapons and that I have no such issue with performance at any fuel times in the G or weapons loaded.
That does not mean get in a min fuel SMT and do some turns against another mig29 clean. That is hardly the average Air RB match is it?
@DracoMindC thank you for taking the time and I know it’s a hassle.
So do it, show us. When you make a claim you support it with your own evidence. A scientific study is done by the person making the assertion. No one would have even considered Einstein if he didn’t support his argument.
In this case, you’re complaining and they’re unfounded and unsupported because all testing (from multiple people now) has shown you that there isn’t an issue.
I did not make the assertion but started off literally saying please look into, and urged anyone who feels the SMT is lacking to do so as well.
I have given much evidence from my continual research into the Mig29 and the technologies of the 4th generation and laid out why the SMT should not be affected much at all by weight of upgrades and a center fuel tank. No one has disagreed with me yet, not even you.
My opinion is based off of continual research and game experience just as GJ has designed the model to operate.
You disagree only because I have not provided proof that it is underperforming. When many players believe it is underperforming, they are all around us. Thats evidence. I do not think you know what the definition of evidence is.
That is something you need you learn before you become Gaijin’s next Creation Director and start calling all the shots.
You believe the SMT is fine, but all you have to go off of is a 20 game experience in the SMT at release months ago and your zero experience in game development and a interpretation of files and code that you really haven’t got a clue what each does and what effect they have in combination of each other and to what degree they may multiply depending on fuel capacity, loadout, airspeed, altitude or attitude.
You haven’t provided any evidence that you know what the hell you are talking about when you look at the games code and files and say “look numbers are slightly different, that means SMT slightly perform less.”
How many games have you developed and how long have you been datamining?
You cannot even tell us exactly what each value affects and what conditions do they affect most or multiply during the many different conditions of flight.
What does Multilimit1: 10.1 do as opposed Multilimit1: 1,0 and what effect does it have on the SMTs model flying Mach 1.06 in a dive and RD-33s are min fuel AB?
I have a genuine question, why don’t YOU make a bug report about the performance of the mig29s, including your sources and your conclusions + tests to see if gaijin accepts it? I’ve seen you report several times that you have sources sometimes you even said -that you understand better or know more- than other people who worked hard in previous reports to fix the 29s, so why don’t you try to help the community improve/correct the mig29s or even do the same to other planes such as the f16s that have an arcade fm?
Well first I do not know much about the SMT and its a developing process as even I am learning that the SMT should not really be that affected at all. When my initial position was that is historical, and people are complaining because it cannot dogfight and its a skill issue.
After playing the aircraft and really researching into the Fulcrum itself further. My position has changed. I do not see any technical reason why upgrades and a fuel tank that remains full before the wings and a better center of gravity performing as it does.
When lesser fighter with a 0.96:1 with loaded weight just need to be 50% internal fuel and their thrust shoots up to a 1:12:1. The SMT is not nearly performing like that at 50% internal, neither is any Mig29.
Though he tried at first with JH7 after long back an forth over history, technology, engines etc. No one is disagreeing with me at all now regarding the Mig29 SMT should really not be too affected, not even Mig.
He is now holding on to the fact (it is a fact) I have not proven the SMT is suffering in performance any more than it should historically. That is true, I do not have direct undeniable proof. But He has not proven it is not suffering A-historically based on an interpretation of game code he has no idea what it truly means either and just started datamining as a new hobby. So it’s a deadlock.
It’s not performing adversely, the MiG-29s perform according to the charts in the manual and the SMT has no drastic deviation from that in spite of all these changes. I’d actually testify it is likely overperforming.
I understand your point but that just diverted from my main questions which were, why don’t you make a bug report with your tests, conclusions and sources, why don’t you at least show your sources to the people here who are willing to help if there is really something wrong that is proven with some reliable source about the mig29s.
for me tbh, the major problem that the 29s are facing rn is having to fight overperforming f16s
They will probably add the flanker when the update comes. Probably the reason why they made mig29 FMs dogshit and overbuffed the f16c. My hope is unironically that they add the f15 only for japan/israel just because the chimpout will be a glorious sight to behold
ok so, wouldn’t it be better to look for sources to maybe fix the JH7? like JH7 flight manual or smt like that If you think it is overperforming, it would be more practical to do that than trying to fix the SMT or any other mig29 without having a reliable source to help with a future bug report.
None of my sources are specifically on the SMT and just the Fulcrum. There is not a lot out there about its specific flight performance compared to the other Fulcrums. Whether it retains its dogfight purity or not.
Whether it does when fuel is consumed to a X% and obtains the Thrust to Weight Ratio to perform like any other Mig29. Nothing out there I found even hints at that.
It does obtain the ability to fly just as good as any other Fulcrum. the question is what internal fuel % is it.
As the current migs are functioning according to the charts it makes sense to me that the SMT will be considerably inferior in terms of maneuverability cuz it is heavier, if we can’t find any source that says otherwise it’ll stay like that unfortunately. I’m kinda bothered by the fact that the tomcat currently can win against any fulcrum ingame (both 2c and 1c), but that’s life, the copium left my body, i already accepted the situation. The guys around this thread did an excelent job fixing the plane, there’s nothing left to do, MAYBE in the future they’ll update the instructor and make the mig better for duels.
There is not much out there regarding that aircraft either and GJ takes advantage of that fact from time to time when it serves the bottom line. It will be brought down to realistic level by itself as GJ knows a lot about aircrafts and always shows that by adding very subtle minor details in models that we do not care about and only their team would have implemented.
If they directly competed in top tier, it may go somewhere but it will have no bearing on the SMT. I do not think it matters.
Let them have their JH-7. GJ It will bring it down after the hype dies off. It is a supersonic dedicated naval strike aircraft after all and they know it.
