Yep , sad thing is the 9M/L is a better and more reliable dogfight missile In %70 of cases because of how badly implemented the R-73 is unless you are extremely close range.
5 Likes
the jh7a heavier too and more better than mig29smt. intresting the controll mode in sim mode is catastrophic in all migs and f16. looks like a fly by wire dont working or they remove all stabilization “system”
1 Like
Lol I have a video of that aircraft too. It has higher lift, smaller turn radius and more control. It is 8,000lbs heavier and almost twice as big with a pathetic thrust to weight. Did I mention it’s not even a fighter?
yea i know, jh7 its a attacker but missing a lot of thing from jh7 too but not intresting atm… my first and biggest problem the very very overbuffed f16 fm. and my second problem the unrealistic and awful controll (instability) in sim mode. i see lot of reports for bad fm, bad controll in sim, bad r73 flare resistance etc… and dont care the devs, nothing happen, nothing. but they always fix the f16 and buff… (okey now the hms missing from blk40 and 50 but i guess they fix the near future)
and the moderators, game master and any staff totally useless and dont watch that forum or forwarding the issues to devs…
2 Likes
Gonna throw up some comparison videos in a sec. Also it highlights the SMTs pathetic instability and lift. Even the Mig29 9-13. Let you guys decide if the Mig29 is PERFECT like one guy in all of WT is claiming.
1 Like
Here is the latest edition of R-73 being garbage. Everything about the MIG-29 might be garbage, except the 27ER
2 Likes
I just played as CAS mig-29smt and I have not been able to destroy anything, all the time I had a ping on the radar that the spaa targeted me or is shooting at me and still trying to destroy them I literally see nothing, I try to look at the direction, on the map, ping on the enemy spawn map to look for the target manually, but I see NOTHING.
Without thermal imaging this is the worst multirole jet on 12.3 BR.
SMT should on already get thermal imaging pod.
1 Like
Things will eventually change, rn they are getting a lot of money from ppl that bought the f4S. I’d recommend you guys to just forget this shit and wait, avoid getting stressful because of this company they’re probably just laughing while we argue.
5 Likes
Did some of my own testing. How aircraft perform with actual limited fuel and weapons one would use in Air RB. It is so dumb to test infinite min fuel and clean as aircraft are drastically better like the F16 which is slick and hyper aerodynamic. Many aircraft outperform the SMT down to BR. 8.7 in rapid pitch up or a par with the Fulcrum series as a whole in lift coefficient.
Many aircraft that are bigger and smaller than the SMT, weigh more with less lift are still better than the SMT and Mig29 series.
Test parameters.
All aircraft begin sea level, under 1,000 ft with fuel loads consistent with the state they are in when ACM/BFM engagements begin in air RB and armed with relevant weaponry.
Each aircraft begins from airfield with zoom to 900km before performing rapid pitch up to demonstrate each lift coefficients.
Reminder: The Mig29 is supposed to be second only to the Su27 in all 4th generation fighters without TVC in alpha and lift coefficient. It is crucial for to supermaneuverable classification and “dynamic attainment.”
Following the rapid pitch is vertical loop and immediate pull up far as possible from the deck to demonstrate each fighters lift coefficient further (or lack thereof).
Immediately following the vertical loop each aircraft will perform a single, level, figure 8 to demonstrate turn rate, roll response and thrust to weight characteristics.
Exiting the figure 8 each aircraft will immediately follow up with an additional rapid pitch up and vertical loop to demonstrate pre stall characteristics and thrust to weight followed by full roll rate to complete the test.
Starting with the SMT
Mig29 SMT alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
The Mig29 SMT 20min fuel cannot achieve higher than 11Gs in rapid pitch up EVEN in full dogfight configuration of R73s alone. (supermanueverabilty + 1:1 Thrust ratio + integral aerodynamic design 40% additional excessive lift in fuselage itself) It can barely complete the test without losing control from sudden side slipping. You must use takeoff flaps or die most of the time. Question: can someone shows me the user manual that states “to activate supermaneuvrability initiate take of flaps”? Thanks.
Mig29 9-13 alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
The Mig29 (9-12) 20min fuel cannot achieve higher than 11Gs in rapid pitch up unless armed with 2xR27Ts and 4xR60s. If it carries ERs its capped at 12gs. (supermanueverabilty + 1:1 Thrust ratio + integral aerodynamic design 40% additional excessive lift in fuselage itself) Again you must use takeoff flaps at some point in flight regime to survive.
JH-7A alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
The JH-7A 20min fuel and is already 8,000lbs heavier than the SMT empty and almost twice the size. It far less than a 1:1 TWR and here it is armed in air-to-air configuration with 2xPL5Cs and 2xPL8s. The jet can immediately hit 12Gs is a rapid pitch up, maintain a tighter turn radius with greatest control and enough lift coefficient and alpha you never had to worry for a second of hitting the ground. Since it lacks leading edge flaps/slats and given fake “combat flaps” which any real pilot will confirm is made up because it actually lacks any leading edges. They are just regular flaps for landing lowered a couple degrees.
Mig-21Bis SAU alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
The Mig21Bis SAU 20min fuel 6xR60s and CM dispenser pod. TTW 0.76 and can immediately hit 11Gs same as the Mig29, but with a greater lift coefficient as it maintains a tighter turn radius from the ground without any fear of collisions. Watch the speeds its rates through the figure 8 as it is just as fast as the mig29 and maintains more control.
F4E Kurnass 2k alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
Kurnass 2000 (F-4E) 20min 6x pythons. 30,328lbs, TTW 0.86. The Kurnass 2k can has the same lift coefficient as the Mig29 SMT and can immediately hit 11Gs, maintain a tighter turn radius with more control and no fear of hitting the ground. Being heavier with a much lower thrust to weight.
1 Like
smt is just bad. for dog fighting it is not suitable, only flank or from the rear.
maybe in the next patch they will give a better version of mig29 maybe the m/m2 version (it’s better, but I don’t know how fm, someone should comment)
2 Likes
Uploading all other aircraft that dominate the SMT in the test, some hilarious ones. Even those under BR 9.0
The F16C and D is performing correct according to every other UFO in game. Its max rapid pitch up in an actual fuel and combat configuration is 11G @ 900km (perfect dogfight speeds). Where it dominates the Mig29s is its lift coefficient & thrust to weight. That is where we need to focus.
The F-16 is also an aerodynamic integral design (only other is the F-14) so high lift capability is legit. It’s just that the Mig29 has ZERO currently and there is no way in hell its pushing out a thrust to weight close to 1:1 right now.
It can barely pull up from hitting the deck. When in reality it should be able to perform better than the F16 in lift. The Mig29 should be able to hit 13Gs in the first rapid pitch up opinion. F-16 comes second.
F-16D alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
F-16C alpha/lift coefficient performance - YouTube
Notice how the F-16 does not have to use take off flaps to complete the test. That is how its supposed to be in all Fulcrum series as well.
1 Like
Left not confuse alpha / lift coefficients with the instant turn rate as a function of G force pulled. This testing is flawed. Doing so with instructor on further skews results.
1 Like
whats up with the camera angles tho? lol how do u play like that xD
1 Like
At least we publish our test.
It does not matter, it established the SMT is not performing any better than the Mig216x R60s in rapid pitch up again the SMT with 6x R73s.
The JH-7A can pull 12Gs from the gate being 8,000lbs heavier.
I haven’t watched the videos but I presume he’s still using trackIR.
1 Like
Does having less G pull numbers on the screen briefly mean it performs worse? Is that what you’re saying?
Are you suggesting you’ll beat my MiG-29SMT in a MiG-21?
oh i see, makes sense
1 Like
Read the descriptions, I know you don’t read crap because you ask the same things over and over. Look at the airspeed it takes to complete the test as opposed to the lumbering SMT. It maintains more energy over the SMT with its “mighty” RD-33s.
Thanks for showing us that the MiG-29SMT (when heaver than the other models) pulls less G. I did my own test, the F-16A pulls less G when it has higher weight on it’ as well… How is this testing alpha or lift coefficients? You didn’t even have localhost up to view worthwhile data.
Please answer my question;
Do you think that those aircraft having a higher instantaneous G loading makes them better?
Is that what your ‘test’ boils down to?