Have been busy, but I will answer to you F15 stuff and come back
1 Like
That is not a flight manual for any MiG-29 found n game @wasa850 that is series one RD -33. That is the initial production 9.12 (first 70 pre production models of the aircraft. they are easily identifiable.
1 Like
The Manufacture has the certificate. The MiG-29 is ICAO compliant (internation Civil Air Organization).
You know, you can also just entirely skip waiting for the certificate and simply read the certificated flight manual which tells you exactly what thrust you have in the MiG-29G at take-off.
Static thrust at Sea level standard day = take-off thrust.
I understand Gaijin has entirely engages in disinformation, but flight manual is designed and part of the airworthiness of any given aircraft & must represent operational numbers by default unless specifically stating other wise
Trauma
Bro now suffers from battered wife syndrome from that fateful day two years ag when the Developers rejected his MiG-29 thrust report. He was never the same. Now he spends his day reporting that player as the problem not the MiG-29 Lol.
1 Like
So you do not have an example of an airworthiness certificate and you havu have never seen one before?
What section of this document contains installed thrust? Or any performance metric for that matter?
1 Like
The flight manual is part of the airworthiness certification procces
Umm the certified Flight manual…The Flight manual is reviewed and verified to by eith FAA, DoD etc. Air worthiness certification the applicant (manufacturer) will not receive certification if they fail to meet stanard,
Did you mean you want the airworthiness cert requirements for the flight manual ? Do you want the certification guidelines? I shoo the all the PDF to you boo.
The DoD requires thrust ratings be verified corrected for all installation losses imposed by the aircraft. Installed
z
Yes they have specific airworthiness cert/licence as it pertains to the engine. I have seen these I forgot what it called, but I will look right now.
lastly, I want say I appreciate you looking into it yourself and not being just another Gaijin parrot who spends their years on sitting on the forum not actually learning anything,
1 Like
Except the NATO flight manuals shows bench thrust values and not installed thrust values. And this is normal procedure.
It’s not even just for the MiG-29. Flame has pointed out multiple flight manuals that use the bench thrust values to you and you refuse to acknowledge it.
I am going to jump out this first floor window If I have to show you again.
STATIC THRUST AT SEA IS TAKE OFF THRUST
1 Like
No, you guysd not on game & I actually refuse hold your hands over and over.
take-off thrust IS BENCH! ITS DETERMINDED BY BENCH!!!
Yes you mind is blown, take off thrust is calculated on a bench because at sea level standard day has been proven to b the MOST accurately determined!!!
You guys see the word 'bench" & you all lose your goddamn minds
Static thrust @ seal level was widely misunderstood by many because gaijin loves hyper fixate on a single word without looking at the overall data & rudely slams the door in their customers face. However they go even further, they will actually engage in disinformation and hand it out like candy.
“channel loss” is one of these fabricated concepts they weaponize to actively disinform players to keep them compliant, shut up and buy the next round Fictional model templates that regurgitated, recycled
every single udate.
No, the flame’s only mistake was that he got a little complacent here on the forum which makes it very easy to fall into believing any particular narrative the developer had decided to drum up.
I am sure he is already dove into the subject of airworthiness certification & give his interest in propulsion & data drive, He probably already way down & already know more than me.
1 Like
The MiG-29 aerodynamics manual shows installed thrust…and surprise surprise…it’s the same values as we have in the game.
You know I am going to ask what manual you are using feety pie… I noticed that some more laughable characters who live in the forum love choosing the earliest pre-production Mig-29 flight manual as their "smoking gun evidence that all later preproduction even POST SOVIET serial modernized MiG-29 are perfectly modelled and are over performing.
When in reality no MiG-29 of the initial production batch of 70 (shown with ventral fins exist in War thunder, but ALL of them modelled & nerfed to fly like them.
1 Like
How are they nerfed to fly like them? Are you talking about the instructor AoA limit that doesn’t matter? Or are we talking about acceleration which also matches flight manual values? Or are we talking about turn rate that also matches manual values?
Aren’t they modeled based on the MiG 29G manual?
In stable designs such as the MiG 29, trim drag must be reduced in some way. Trim drag in aircraft with relaxed stability is low, which allows for better performance than in stable designs. I know how trim drag is managed in the Tomcat and Eagle, but I don’t know how it’s done in the MiG-29… Do you know how the Soviets solved this problem in the MiG-29?
Takeoff thrust ratings are almost always defined at Sea Level Standard Day Temperature Static or near‑static conditions
This is not arbitrary. It’s because below Mach 0.3, air behaves essentially incompressible, meaning:
Density is stable, pressure relationships are predictable. Engine inlet conditions are extremely repeatable
Test‑stand (bench) and aircraft‑installed inlet conditions are closest to each other
This makes static sea‑level thrust the most repeatable, certifiable, and comparable rating across engine. There is not existing thrust rating that are more accurate that sea level, static testing. They have whole books and studies on all types testing to determine the most accurate installed rating.
Static Sea, level testing has for a VERY long time proven repeatedly as most accurate process in determine installed thrust. But is limited as the forward airspeed beyond
That is why take-off thrust (static at sea, standard day) is the manufactures guaranteed baseline thrust that all engines of the same type will reliably produce at take off.
Look, I am here to generate traction to fix intentionally nerfed models (that absolutely exist), several years has passed & the developer has demonstrated they have no intention of addressing the total lack of historical representation of the Mig-29.
The only recent developmental activity is when they want to use the name and image of the MiG-29 to sell a premium or throw it in a new tech tree to serve exclusively as a speed bump to slow down players progression. They are oddly new content based on totally fictional capabilities, unnecessary disinformation campaigns to justify it. Every quarter is a process that repeats itself. fictio constantly force fed down the throat of all players, many young aerospace enthusiasts. Literally kids are taught by the developer to believe outrageously false information all just so they twist & bend anyway possible all they can avoid the minimal work do not have go back update models & shit BR and the matchmaker.
This subject of installed thrust, take-off thrust is very interesting as it directly opposes one of Gaijin most sensitive & protected fictional modelling parameters of the game for aircraft. Because almost every single aircraft is modelled after this totally imaginary concept that they need to remove several thousand kgf of thrust from the top of their head. from every single jet engine to feed their made-up aerospace propulsion term “channel loss”. A terminology that does not exist in Aerospace propulsion engineering and was borrowed from Telecommunications and relates to propagation of radio frequencies & that entire unrelated industry and science.
1 Like
I think the fundamental issue in this discussion is whether 8,300 kp is installed or uninstalled thrust. The data is from the manual for the -29G (which I believe is 9-12 with avionics modifications).
I often see people discussing air duct losses here, but engine power losses are also caused by the engine driving hydraulic pumps, the transmission, air conditioning, etc., and that is no small loss of thrust.
I agree, 100% it-- a fundamental issue
It absolutely is stalled thrust I will put up a study on why static sea level testing has remained the most reliable thrust deternination
2 Likes
Mig-29 energy gain diagramm, at 13000kg with clean wings
and it lines up with this diagramm right here:
and what it shows is that the thrust is correct if not slightly overperforming
because if it had even more thrust it wouldnt line up with the graphs at all
3 Likes
fairly sure the german one just has the exact same info as ru manual just translated to de
but also if you want something that’s very grossly and obviously overperforming look at 6.4. in ru manual or fig. 15 in de manual and try to sustain g at high speeds, it’s missing way too much induced drag past about 1100km/h ias (7g sustained @ ~1200 ias vs 1130 ref, 6g ~1290 vs 1190 ref and so forth)
Which version of the MiG 29 do these graphs refer to?
I went through some of the documents I have, and it looks like 8,300 kgp is the uninstalled engine thrust. This thrust should be reduced by about 10% because the engine powers the aircraft’s internal systems and due to the loss of the intake duct.
The thrust then changes dynamically according to altitude and speed.