That comment was an answer about why the F-16C was left unchanged when we were talking about STR, and in general I basically only did STR testing in this thread, so that’s what I was mostly talking about.
Although I did write “ANY MEAN” which was absolutely wrong, should have written “any major way”.
You are right about that.
Anyway F-16C is not an UFO
In general I agree, although need to test the MiG-23MLA further, that thing STR is still extremely scary
Fair enough.
Is it just a superior greater lift generating 4th gen fighter? Even though the Fulcrum has a higher lift integral design and greater thrust to weight than the F-16C?
1.09:1 VS 1.04:1
I just cannot wrap my head around the idea that the Mig29 is performing correctly against many fighters in game.
The F-16A is performing great @Giovanex05 bravo for that. It will not rate all day and night like before and dies out compared to stronger aircraft. It’s got a nasty first turn which is expected. But after, you actually have a chance to defeat. Thank you.
Yes the MiG-23 STR is interesting. Seems to me that it’s mostly accurate with the same sweep as the charts but full forward becomes a monster.
I’m not certain I’d say the MiG-29 has a tighter turn radius at optimal rate speeds than the F-16 but it definitely should have vastly superior low speed handling and performance.
MiG-29 is better in turn radius with sim controls, the only reason it is (slightly) worse in air rb is the instructor.
To be more clear about why this disadvantages the MiG-29 more: being aerodynamically unstable, the F-16 does not need to deflect it’s ailerons a lot more to push higher AoA, which makes it lose less efficiency at higher AoAs compared to a stable aircraft like the MiG-29.
The ability to choose AoA would give it even closer sustained turn rate to the F-16C (also considering that the rd-33 thrust curve is a lot more aggressive), and at the same time give it far better nose pointing and radius capabilities when required (MiG-29 simply pulls more AoA and more maximum lift/weight).
Better plane (better airframe we mean) at what?. At gun fighting I do think that if both are played perfectly the F-16C is a bit better, overall it still rates a bit better and suffer less from not being in the sweet spots. A MiG-29 will definitely have opportunities to shoot given the better 1 circle performance (especially if the fight starts at altitude).
In a HOBS missiles fight the MiG-29 is better, it pulls more AoA, has a tighter turn radius and has better thrust to weight if slowing down and accelerating is needed.
In a BVR fight (if given the same avionics) ironically MiG-29 is better no contest. It is faster, climbs better, is better at high speed manoeuvring… it has basically all the advantages the F-15 airframe has over the F-16
That goes against the US’s energy maneuverability theory. The Russians emphasized on low speed handling and supermaneuverability.
So, by this statement not only does the F-16C handles better at transonic and supersonic flight (It does in game), it should also VASTLY SUPERIOR at low-speed handling and performance (It does in game)
So pretty much you are admitting right here that the F-16 is just a better overall platform to the Supermaneuverable higher thrust to weight Fulcrum in all flight regimes.
Thank you.
Or did I misquote you?
Indeed, and said some stuff that doesn’t really make sense.
We will let the community decide.
You said the F-16 should have VASTLY superior low speed handling performance over the Fulcrum.
It already has vastly superior high speed performance over the Mig29 in game
So its just an overall better fighter? Yes OR No?
what is your opinion on the other f16s? blk10/15/20, they all manage to beat the mig29(9.12/9.13 and the SMT), easily in 1c, 2c, they do literally everything the mig29 does but better, they have greater maneuverability at low speeds too.
I personally think this is a bit unrealistic, mig29 (at least 9.13 and 9.12), should have the advantage against any f16 in 1c and fights at low speeds like (bellow 400/300 km/h)
That’s the opposite of what I said.
But you say the Mig29 is perfect.
But it does not have anything close to the same performance at low speed as the F16C.
huh?
he literally said the opposite of what you said zig…
At optimal rate speed it definitely has since F-16 optimal speed is higher.
exactly
My bad misread boys. Thought he was flip flopping again.
Inquire about it in the F-16 thread so we may resume discussion of the Yugoslavian MiG-29 manual.
I’ve explained quite well what the F-16s inaccuracies are.
Ok I just want you to confirm the Mig29 is lacking so we can figure something out. We all need to be of one accord.
Again, not what I said.
This:
Without the instructor the MiG-29 is better in one circle and AoA.
So it’s not, and you maintain its perfect?
Just the F-16C is the overperforming one?
But other aircraft not the F-16C is can dominate it in low speed performance…
That is why I will start testing with local. There is a lovely aircraft called the F-14B that I have been destroying both in low speed dogfights.
All F-16s are overperforming. It’s not relevant to this thread. I’ve already asked you to scoot the questions elsewhere or are you trying to derail?