my guess would be the Mig-29S without the r-77 or the Su-27P
Those too
I dont think its a good idea to add the Serbian 29SM to the USSR, as majority of people want it to be independent (Yugo). iirc, theres other nations who have the 29SM, although with some things missing I think.
1 Like
I mean premiums don’t stop them adding them in the future as independent trees
And gaijin don’t seem too interested in any new trees, just sub-trees and premium/squadron/event vehicles for the current ones
I just seen that mig29 is being released on DCS…
My money is on it not being a cope bus
It’s the exact same flight model as the fc3 one
Does it lose to everything around its level in a dogfight like on war thunder?
It’s worse than most planes like the su27 f16c fa18c, mirage 2k. Better than f15e or c
1 Like
Yep, it does have L-150 antennas on micro pylons close to the wingtips, like SMT.
Might have to have a butchers
Cheers man
1 Like
No it isn’t as bad as in WT and it only struggles against the top ~5 dogfighters
2 Likes
There’s also a lot less power creep in dcs compared to wt. wt best flight model is the eurofighter while the best fm in dcs is the fa18c
Its not 14,200kg mass, its 14,450kg. This value was calculated directly from the MiG-29 Drag Index (MiG-29G mass set as 14,360kg, 45kg per R-60MK). Given another report was accepted using this value, but for ITR correction, i don’t see logical to claim i haven’t proven anything about the mass used. I see no reason why they would test the plane at a different mass and not indicate this as they did with other charts (Such as STR Figure, where they explicitly state 13,000kg mass, for example).
If you can find another value that disproves mine, feel free to write it, i looked several times into the manual and there was no mention of a different mass used for Figure A5-1.
moreover, such figures don’t look realistic at that mass.
Whether they look realistic or not for anyone is irrelevant.
1 Like
I saw a couple videos of it, and the main problem everyone points out seems to be handling it more than its actual flight performance. I wonder how a MiG-29K/M with modern FCS would perform against those jets
1 Like
he’s techmod for russian version of forum. I think he’s probably already looked into this
If thats the case then im open for corrections, but then id find it very strange for the testers/writers not to put such a crucial variable for acceleration charts if not used the “Base” value.
This is apparently a spoiler for that report; an official response will be issued later.
There is no reason to believe that the graph refers to a mass of 14,200-14,500 kg.
Other sources provide similar graphs for 13,000 kg.
Clear confirmation of the mass for which these graphs are intended is needed.
2 Likes
Thanks for the headsup
But if thats the case, which other value would be to be used should the chart not indicate it? I guess the 13,000kg comes from the RU manual, but then it feels like the charts provided by the german manual are virtually useless given the huge discrepancy of mass when not indicated
2 Likes