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?
1 Like
What he is saying is that the MiG-29 is good as it is, F-16C is not over performing in rate but in maximum AoA (which is something that does not concern air RB for everyone else interested)
1 Like
That’s because the F-14B rates better than both of them at low speed, and in general the ability of good low speed STR is something common with all variable geometry aircraft (or in general high aspect wings).
In a vacuum, the MiG-29 can do a larger AoA excursion one time but the F-16 can handle steady 40+ degrees AoA with yaw roll / yaw rates and exhibits almost zero instability during such maneuvers when irl these would result in spin conditions and possibly pitch-out departure followed by a developing deep stall.
The reason it doesn’t, is because gaijin has modeled the F-16 as statically stable to avoid bricking mouse aim.
Interesting.
I thought you were commenting specifically on the f16c, not considering the other variants since the others, in my opinion, are UFOs, the f16c is fine imo, i was talking about against the other f16s(blk10/15/20)… against the f16c i dont see any problem, even with instructor the 9.13 and 9.12 can beat him in 1c
i will stop talking about the f16 here, sorry, I was just curious about his opinion regarding the other f16s.
1 Like
He was talking about the SMT, which is simply worse at doing almost everything compared to the MiG-29A
1 Like
You can quote me from before and after fixes all day, doesn’t mean that what I said still applies today. It did then.
Not when its flying with 4 sparrows, 4 sidewinders and 30 min of fuel when the Mig29 SMT is 20min with 6xR73s.
It is VASTLY lighter than the F-14B. and generates more lift in wings 60% in the Mig29 and 30% in the Tomcat.
You guys keep testing aircraft clean and min fuel.
Do you guys have any Idea how different aircraft are CLEAN AND MIN FUEL? They are drastically different and perform 3x+ better than actual combat loads and fuel.
This is were your testing err.
I had understood it had stopped being able to consistently turn at 40 degrees AoA.
That’s definitely not normal lol
Perhaps the SMT also indicated the wrong empty weight, added 740kg. Although the weight of the overhead tank can not even be 500kg
The SMT also has the same center of gravity as earlier models. The entire model could use some work but we have nothing to report it with.
It was doing 90°+ and cartwheeling before with ease of recovery in ~1/4 a turn. This was absurd. It’s a lot more reasonable, but still overperforming. Especially at low speed and fuel quantity in mouse aim still.
1 Like
Why are you lying,
what fixes occurred on or after 11/23? I am quoting you after Thanksgiving.
Its very simple, you really have no idea what you are saying and flip flop daily. last week you claim the Mig29 is perfect. 3 days ago you conceded the Mig29 is not. Now you are back to claiming its perfect and the F-16C is overperforming and the Mig29 was fixed in a phantom update over the Holiday weekend.
Just come out and say I do not know. Please refer to Gio moving forward. That is respectable.
What am I lying about in that quote then? I had assumed you just quoted me pre and post fix like you did 10 million times intentionally this week.
I dont think so I see the 11600kg weight thrown around a lot and considering the 9-13 with its own modifications is 11200kg empty (an additional 300kg) the SMT seems about right
Any source for the tomcat generating only 30% of his lift with the wings when they are fully open?
Also total lift matters little in a rate fight, high aspect wings are good at low speed because they generate very little drag compared to the lift produced (that’s why gliders are built the way they are).
Also I don’t understand what MiG-29 we are considering here, the SMT or the MiG-29A?
Thrust to weight ins’t disproportionally better.
20 min is over half of the total fuel in the normal MiG-29, no wonder it suffers more than the tomcat when increasing fuel. In general being less affected by fuel and ordinance is an intrinsic advantage for heavier fighters. Still I’m pretty sure a MiG-29A airframe instead with 20min fuel will beat the F-14B with 30min in a dogfight (even with 20 min on both if flown properly my money is on the MiG, especially with R-73s).
Plus the F-14 is over performing a bit in rate imho
We do the tests at the weights indicated in the manuals, doing a test at higher weights is useless when the manual’s figures are for different weights
Stop assuming, Dr. Datamine.
I will bring forward testing with local host and actually videotape.
However. I will not try to match flight manuals or undershoot them. I will run my test blind with local host to the best of every aircraft ability and let you go over whether they coincide with performance consistent with what manuals we do have.
Enjoy you Sunday everyone.
1 Like
weights and drag of weapons?