i will repeat one more time, just do your own damn bug reports if you think you can do better and move on with your life.
No one is stopping you from commenting anything, especially if it’s useful for the mig29 whether it’s good or bad things, but useless things like insults are just ridiculous and completely childish and that’s something you’re constantly doing, if someone isn’t agreeing with what you’re saying, again, do your own bug report and move on with your life.
ok thats cool and all but just curious what was the discussion before you came, happening after you came, and the current discussion we’ve been trying to had
and then tell me when this top speed discussion happened and explain why it suddenly became relevant again? Because as far as I can see you rather attack people instead of making arguments that im not even sure what argument youve been trying to make because all your posts have been wildly off topic
it doesnt take a rocket science to see gaijan say “flight model is accurate from our testing” then see they added 300kg of weight and come to the conclusion the flight model is no longer accurate and needs to be reconfigured accordingly. And from my own testing Ive come to the same conclusion and so have others. So once again I fail to see uh what your primary claim here is beyond coming here and making a ruckus because you appear to really dislike a specific forum user. Its just counter productive plain and simple
anyways if you have anything to say related to turnrate go ahead, if not I dont see any further reason to both with you any longer
Oh please no Draco, don’t hurt me so!
Have you actually tested the SMT turn rate since it was buffed today? Because everyone I’ve heard using it says it is an energy retention monster now.
yes I have actually tested it, and its the exact same as it has always been in air rb. And from the changes I datamined there was nothing in the code changed that would affect that. In sim its a bit nicer at low speed with more controllability at higher angles of attack which is nice but its still a boat.
He’s been derailing the thread and claiming there was nothing wrong with the MiG-29 FM since the beginning of the thread, to which I proved him definitively wrong multiple times. From this discourse he claims I have a elementary level education in physics and that I don’t understand what I’m talking about. If that was the case, he could easily have proved otherwise or made his own report to counter what I was saying.
Instead, the devs went ahead and fixed the FM per every report I’ve made on the MiG-29 and likewise say they will fix the F-16 too. What I’m doing is having a positive effect on the game as a whole and holding all countries aircraft to the same standard when it comes to modeling errors within the FM or their missiles.
In regards to the mass having anything to do with speed… they latched onto that specific comment when they were the ones claiming that the weight of the R-27ER was what should prevent it from going mach 5 when the AIM-54 (a MUCH MUCH bigger and heavier missile) with a SIGNIFICANTLY less powerful (but longer burning) motor has a higher top speed… the logic isn’t even reasonably sound. How could something significantly more powerful and smaller, less draggy have a lower top speed than the AIM-54? Especially when both have >1000 m/s deltaV?
As I said, he’s been trying to derail the thread for 800+ comments. He’s been warned enough.
???
You have just proven what he said.
thats not related to energy retention thats for stability at high AoA (basically you ever notice how in some planes in sim when you pull the stick (or push the mouse) really hard they start to roll and you cannot control the aircraft?)
AoA you cannot (and it will not let you) pull in Air RB unless you’re actively TRYING to spin at stall speeds.
yeah it makes no difference in air rb, especially with instructor
So you’re a complete liar. I never once even mentioned the R-27ER or AIM-54 in that thread. YOU were the one who went in there and derailed it with your usual trite comments and pseudo-science. Stop trying to rewrite the narrative. This is what makes it so ironic that you’re bitching and whining so much about me “derailing” this thread. You do it ALL THE TIME.
Don’t pull yourself off too hard. I’m sure you genuinely believe this is the case too.
These have no effect on RB either?
they do not unless youre playing RB in full real control, and even in sim nothing to really do with energy retention
I said “they”, not you.
I stopped replying in there because Ziggy was only baiting. I entertained it, my fault. I assisted with derailing that thread, but to me it isn’t so important as a thread dedicated specifically to a single aircraft’s history, design, performance where there are actual legitimate issues… where the topic isn’t focused on someone’s VERY flawed opinion on some aspect of the game.
Not unless you’re at such low speeds that you can reach that AoA region. As Draco said;
Yeah of course. More like you misremembered. “They latched onto a comment after they”…in what context would a third party ever assume you weren’t talking about the same “they”?
Oh I guess that makes it ok then. Maybe this thread isn’t so important to me.
You realise just saying this doesn’t actually make it true?
Anyway… Anything new on the Mig29SMT? any official word?
if you dont play sim: nah
if you do play sim: you’re more stable at lower speeds higher angles of attack
If the turnrate report goes through and is a success the SMT should feel a bit nicer, basically feel 300kg lighter (tho its weight will be the same)
I hit the deck like 3 times last night because the jet would not roll or pull up with 15 min of fuel with 2-3 R73s and even no missiles…
I do think its a little too heavy for its thrust to weight. IMO.
I do hope turn rate get gets a little better. Its still not going to help that its a very slow plane. I barely stay above mach in most matches.
Gotta love how asking for a somewhat correct fm just starts a flame war now.