Mikoyan-Gurevich MiG-29 Fulcrum - History, Design, Performance & Dissection

[Merf_HD]

Both 29M 9-42 and MiG-35 are modular - that goes for the CMs too.
They can either use the standart 2x 30x26mm BVP-30-26 Pods for flares or the 2x 9x50mm UV-5 Pods.

Also all modern Russian Fulcrums are able to use the external UV-5-08 - which increases the flare amount by 60x50mm Flares/Chaff.

[BBCRF]

@Merf_HD

the MiG-29M 9-42 is essentially a direct predecessor of the MiG-35 as every 9-42 tech is also present or improved upon on the MiG-35.
its also the most modern MiG-29 airframe in existence - having better flight performance than the 9-12A and better avionics than the SMT. (only ofc if you dont count the 35 as a 29)

9-42 never existed

@Merf_HD

its still classified so getting infos is kinda rough, but what we do know is that it uses a Zhuk-ME or Zhuk-AE depending on configuration (AE was developed and also tested but never intended to be put into full service).
According to ROSCOSMOS its also able to carry a MAWS - but which MAWS, what type and if it contains a CM pod or not isnt known to me at least.

What nonsense

@Merf_HD

You might have already heard about the MIG-29M 9-42 as the MiG-29M2 (not the double seat version)
as for some reason some people refer to it that way.

Due to the fact that both the 9-15 and the 9-42 are both experiemental aircraft of the same family it would be cool to maybe see the 9-15 as a premium and the 9-42 as its techtree counterpart

9-42 never existed

[BBCRF]

I have these books telling about all the MiG and 9-42 planes that don’t exist anywhere.

[Merf_HD]

The MiG-29M(2) 9-42 is the double seat version of the MIG-29M 9-41

Afaik Russia doesnt operate the 9-41s, thats why I only mentioned the 9-42 which is currently used by the russian airforce as a combat capable training aircraft.

If it turns out that russia did infact operate the 41s id be fine with that being added too yk.
But there exists lots of evidence pointing towards the existence of the 9-42 and 9-41, saying it doesnt exist is conspirancy

[Merf_HD]

Well but first and foremost what gaijin has to do before introducing newer Fulcrums - fix the current flight model.

The thrust charts are completly off - the channelloss is at 22% which is ridicolous considering most aircraft that we do have channelloss data on are in the 5-10% range
(also the flight manual says it has around 7800kgf, but hey thats just an official document - it could be fake yk)

The drag goes into unknown territory when you go beyond 25° AOA for some reason (maybe because there is no data on the drag at such high AOA maneuvers because the 29 cant do those irl)

and if you dare to go below 1200km/h even the F18s will outaccelerate you (which is like clinically proven to be wrong by reports from Swiss F18 pilots)

[BBCRF]

What nonsense you wrote. The two-seat version of the 9-41 is the 9-47, not the 42. And yes, Russia operates 9-41

[BBCRF]

9-41R

[Merf_HD]

could that maybe just mean that I confused the name of the 9.47 with the 9.42?
from what I can find about the 9.47 its exactly the aircraft I described, no?

And I still dont really see any reason to be this toxic, its not like gaijin takes the info on a forum discussion to model a plane (or look at the discussion in general)

[BBCRF]

@Merf_HD

could that maybe just mean that I confused the name of the 9.47 with the 9.42?

Don’t mislead people. The new airframe has the designation 9-41 single and 9-47 double, and then various indexes have already gone.

[BBCRF]

9-47S

[Merf_HD]

jeez louis man, I get it.
I didnt try to mislead anyone - I had the wrong designation of the airframe.

I did a mistake and im sorry for that, do you want me to do a backflip or something as a punishment?

[BBCRF]

@Merf_HD

I did a mistake and im sorry for that, do you want me to do a backflip or something as a punishment?

Yes, a backflip, ahhah