Yeah, the MiG-29A is still a blast at 12.7 and it still feels better than the Su-27for general air RB purpose at anything but very high altitude even after it got the FM fixed.
The 29A is extremely fast, accelerates better than anything that isn’t 4.5 gen or an F-15 (and after mach 1 it also leaves the F-15s in the dust) and turns very well until sub 500kph which is to be expected since it’s a stable aircraft (the F-15C (the F-15A is overperforming by a landslide) also feels like a boat sub 500kph since it’s also stable).
Very high altitude performance is it’s only real weakness right now, I’ll test it very soon since it might underperform in thrust there.
3 Likes
It has 0.5 oswald from the datamines. Your calculated weight is totally wrong. Stop saying it’s right if it’s extremely obviously wrong.
1 Like
Looking at the way you talk you don’t even know what the Oswald coefficient is…
First of all you need to read the datelines better since it’s currently something between 0.6 and 0.63 for “flaps polar 0”.
Second the Oswald coefficient in game is not related to in real life Oswald, and even if it was Oswald is not useful to use it in the way people want to use it on this forum for military aircraft, because the lift model where it is used completely fails at any relevant angle of attack.
Calculate it yourself then lol. Also since according to you I “obviously” do this wrong then you don’t need me to do bug reports:
Again, I encourage you to do bug reports yourself if you think there’s really something wrong:
here Is the site for it: Community Bug Reporting System
And here are all the charts you might need:
5 Likes
Manual uses weight down to only ~12800 kg, 1500 kg fuel is constant.
You assert a WRTI test is wrong, and the person who created it is wrong.
This is making fiction.
Yes the lift model is totally wrong yet MiG-21 has 0.67 Oswald and F-15 has 0.86. You only gave excuses, the game Oswald is normally close to the real plane.
So the loss of energy in initial turns, or slightly above sustained is drastic, since the induction of drag in turns is worse than an F-4 Phantom
Now you say, the Oswald, 0.60-0.63, this is fine, the weight in the diagrams must be 11300 kg.
SEP page gave 12800 kg clean.
I expected better from you. I was wrong.
And indeed the manuals are very easy to get to.
1 Like
Can you tell me which page specifies that the minimum weight used in the manual is 12800kg or page that says that the SEP chart is 12800kg?
The test is done correctly, in fact the red dots for 5G show that 5G is sustained at 570kph, which matches what the sustained turn diagrams say:
What I am disputing is that the SEP diagram is either for a lower weight or for a different engine mode not provided in the manual.
this is clearly wrong, turning at the same deg/sec the MiG-29 loses FAR less speed than a phantom.
I don’t know super well how the game engine works, but I assure you irl Oswald and in game Oswald are not 1:1 related.
Since you are so smart, here’s how LLT (which si the lift model Oswald comes from) is derived https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAd55IRHNKM. Tell me again with a straight face that it can be applied for aircraft at high AoA when flows is extremely unsteady.
1 Like
Ignore him on the MiG-29. I used the diagram to show the inaccuracy of the oswald number.
Now let’s look into the manual SEP, because, while she is not an F-16, it is actually within 10% when (actually) clean.
It has increments of 20 on the Y axis, m/s. You can see that the SEP should hit slightly under 350 m/s with 12800 kg. Which is only enough for 1500 kg fuel, gun ammo, and 4x P-62 pylons, for the R-60’s.
Page 2 with 12800 kg.
The current model flies worse than a MiG-21, since it’s inductive drag at high angles is incredibly high. The coefficient, like the better handled US models, should be similar.
2 Likes
If ur so certain of your position then why don’t you write a report on your own instead of being such an arrogant, annoying, sassy asshole towards ppl who actually spent a considerable amount of their time trying to improve the game?
Do you even have the mig29?
4 Likes
I think if they give MiG-29s in-game R-73s (which they should), all Soviet and GDR models should get them (and R-27ER removed) as it was the primary weapon system of the MiG-29 and it had them for its entire service history - it’d be like if they added an F-14A “Early” without AIM-54s. I would love to see a Soviet 9-12 but it should come with R-73s. If Gaijin really wants a 12.7 MiG-29 w/ R-60Ms only, it should be an export model for a customer who was not given R-73s, such as Iraq.
2 Likes
Would also be cool to see a MiG-29 (9-14) come as an event vehicle someday, to give a multirole-capable MiG-29 at a lower tier than 29SMT
We can further verify how accurate current MiG-29FM is by using this chart I’ve never tested before.
One needs to look at time to decelerate from one speed to the other doing a constant G turn (ideally Ny = 5) with the engines at 0% (not shut off). This time mass is shown (13000kg) so there are no doubts on how to use it.
1 Like
oh damn no one said anything about that - very nice
1 Like
@Henge11220 since people are throwing around my tests on the longitudinal acceleration chart i might as well give an updated one with more data(dont think i posted that to the forums before):
6 Likes
Hi, what conditions did you use for this test (alt, mass, stores)?
Also, is this all done manually or was some of this automated?
1 Like
ah lemme check the fuel load i used - been a while since i did any testing on that. But i did it all manually with trim keeping margins of; ±100m alt, ± 2-5m/s climb rate & ±0.1G. And datapoints were averaged from at least 3 successful tests meeting those margins
3 Likes
1930kg of fuel, clean wings
3 Likes
What about alt?
To avoid any misunderstandings: I have nothing against your test, in fact I believe it was done right since 0 acceleration at 5G is measured at ~570kph, which is the speed that the sustained turn chart indicates for 5G. I was a bit harsh in the posts above because of people throwing around charts without context.
As @Grimtax asked above was the test done with 13000kg mass? Because no mass is indicated for the chart, and the chart would be conflicting with the other ones if it was for 13000kg. Since the manual has the polars and they mach with the in game MiG-29 lift and drag wise, the only way this chart would not be for 13000kg is if there was a more powerful engine mode not shown in the manual, which might be possible since, if the installed thrust shown in the manual is the true max, thrust losses would be really really high
3 Likes
2km alt as per chart
2 Likes
ok that’s 13000kg mass
2 Likes
yep