I’ve seen so many F-16’s try that just to eat my R-73
Ok, Boys this is called a pivot. In this situation, you ignore the attempt to draw focus away and go back to hitting him over the head with the same question that he fails to answer.
Where does it say supermaneuvrability means losing control of your aircraft?
as it should
although with r73s and magic IIs lurking around, it can be quite risky
but what bothers me is f16a being able to engage in a scissor or 1 circle with a mig or a mirage, while it clearly shouldn’t
as for the mig29 missing AoA, i didn’t follow the matter tbh. but afaik it’s not the only plane in that situation
1 Like
In the part where the MiG-29’s design was to ease post-stall recovery. The only maneuver it does that would fit your definition of supermaneuvrability does not allow the aircraft to control itself beyond maximum lift. It only allows the aircraft to safely pitch the nose up beyond maximum lift and then recover after the dynamic attainment without concern for complete and total departure or spin conditions. Stop dragging this on.
MiG-29’s AoA is correct per three separate flight manuals and the director of 'TsAGI (Russias main aerospace design bureau). Ziggy is just going on about nonsense.
ha
correct me if i’m wrong but shouldn’t it be able to pull the infamous cobra ? maybe it’s already possible in game in full realistic controls ? genuinely asking, never tried myself
or maybe it’s not a problem related to AoA
1 Like
Do we need to go over the definition of a stall once again?
Sorry team, some of us have a difficult time keeping up with the class.
Because an aircraft stalls does not mean you lost control of the aircraft. it means the aircraft lost the mechanical force of lift.
That is your misinterpretation of the word post-stall and recovery. Recovery simply means the aircraft has regained the mechanical force of lift.
Yes, it’s fully capable of doing 90+ degrees nose attitude Cobra in-game currently. Even the MiG-29SMT.
The ability to perform dynamic attainment and reach angles of attach beyond what is sustainable result in sudden deceleration and aerobraking. The aircraft gets too slow, it cannot maintain normal flight and must recover. This is what it is describing. A stall means you do not have effective operation of the controls and must recover from those conditions.
There is no maneuver the MiG-29 can perform that would fit the description of supermaneuvrability that doesn’t also result in a stall and recovery.
LMFAO Put your 500 word elementary school dictionary away. LMFAO (of aircraft or its pilots)
NASA definition.
The condition in which an airfoil has stopped producing lift. The most direct cause is an excessively high angle of attack. For most airfoils this occurs in the 15-20 degree range.
Wiki definition.
In fluid dynamics, a stall is a reduction in the lift coefficient generated by a foil as angle of attack increases. This occurs when the critical angle of attack of the foil is exceeded. The critical angle of attack is typically about 15°, but it may vary significantly depending on the fluid, foil, and Reynolds number.
Stalls in fixed-wing flight are often experienced as a sudden reduction in lift as the pilot increases the wing’s angle of attack and exceeds its critical angle of attack (which may be due to slowing down below stall speed in level flight). A stall does not mean that the engine(s) have stopped working, or that the aircraft has stopped moving—the effect is the same even in an unpowered glider aircraft. Vectored thrust in aircraft is used to maintain altitude or controlled flight with wings stalled by replacing lost wing lift with engine or propeller thrust, thereby giving rise to post-stall technology.
Okay, so we agree. What is your issue?
The MiG-29’s “Supermaneuvrability” are always at the cost of its’ airspeed and puts it into post-stall regions that it must recover from. It cannot maintain these attitudes because it lacks TVC.
On the flipside, the F/A-18 and F-35 can perform maneuvers and maintain attitude at the cost of altitude much in the same way the MiG-29 can. So is it not also Supermaneuverable?
Some aircraft are capable of performing Pugachev’s Cobra without the aid of features that normally provide post-stall maneuvering such as thrust vectoring. Advanced fourth generation fighters such as the Su-27, MiG-29 along with their variants have been documented as capable of performing this maneuver using normal, non-thrust vectoring engines.
NO.
Can you prove current Block-50’s ingame performance with flight manuel?
İ would like to see those charts tbh.
In aerobatics, the cobra maneuver (or just the cobra), also called dynamic deceleration. It is a dramatic and demanding maneuver in which an airplane flying at a moderate speed abruptly raises its nose momentarily to a vertical and slightly past vertical attitude, causing an extremely high angle of attack and momentarily stalling the plane, making a full-body air brake before dropping back to normal position, during which the aircraft does not change effective altitude.
The maneuver relies on the ability of the plane to be able to quickly change angle of attack (alpha) without overloading the airframe, and sufficient engine thrust to maintain nearly constant altitude through the entire move, but also post-stall stability and aerodynamics that allows for the recovery to level flight. The maneuver demands accurate pitch control, alpha stability and engine-versus-inlet compatibility for the aircraft, as well as a high skill level on the part of the pilot.
The cobra maneuver is an example of supermaneuverability, specifically poststall maneuvering. The Herbst maneuver and the helicopter maneuver are similar post-stall maneuvers that are often executed by 4.5th Generation and 5th Generation fighter aircraft employing thrust vectoring.
To perform the cobra, the maneuver must be entered from fairly high subsonic (Transonic) speeds. Proper entry speed is necessary because, if the maneuver is entered too slowly, the plane might be unable to complete the maneuver or return to level flight with sufficient speed, while entering at too high a speed would create g-forces so high that the pilot loses consciousness or the airframe is damaged. High thrust is also needed throughout the maneuver to not stall out.
High thrust to weight & engine-versus-inlet compatibility is a requirement for supermaneuvrability. The F-18 and F-35 lack.
They cannot cobra.
The J35 can do the Cobra, and did it first. Is it supermaneuverable? No. It just has good post-stall recovery capability. So the idea is that you are able to use these maneuvers tactically. I would say the J35 has no reason to do a Cobra, it has no HOBS missiles… so it is not supermaneuverable. The MiG-29 incorporates such weapon systems, as does the F/A-18 and F-35. They heavily rely on these weapons in modern combat and these capabilities are necessary.
In particular, the F/A-18 and F-35 can turn on a dime. Even tighter than the MiG-29. This is to jam the “WEZ”. They do so by attaining angles of attack beyond maximum lift and aerobraking to cut speed. These are the same principles theorized by TsAGI for the MiG-29 and Su-27.
And to be quite honest, they don’t just meet the standard TsAGI set the bar for when calling their designs supermaneuverable… they exceed them.
The MiG-29 can only “Cobra” at or below 300 knots. Above this it cannot attain 90 degrees nose attitude. It certainly cannot actually achieve 90 degrees true AoA as claimed.
The J35 super stalls to do it. AKA DEEP STALL
Thats not a cobra. If the Mig29 cannot go past 90 its not a cobra. Are you saying the Mig29 cannot cobra?
So the MiG-29 can’t Cobra?