They bought Mig29M instead of SMT Ziggy.
Now think about it.
4 Likes
Its late man, I am sorry. I did read it. You still concluded its a big waste of time and money futher kicking a dead horse, that is the Mig29
I will look into Algeria, I did not know they have quite the comprehensive air force. They got a bunch of flankers and getting more!
2 Likes
egypt
2 Likes
That’s the entire point dude. If the country is expecting a significantly better off-the-shelf aircraft, why invest in something that will require pretty much a complete rebuild to offer even comparable performance?
It’s like taking the very first M1 Abrams and saying it was bad because it’s being compared to the Leopard 2A8. MiG-29A 9.12 and EFT were by the time over 20 years apart in terms of technology advancement - and the funniest bit in this, the Luftwaffe did initially want to extensively upgrade their MiGs with Russia’s help (but also by involving their industry which would produce the new components), but saw how the EFT blew it out of the water, then saw how their budget got slashed - welp, there they go, have fun Poland.
4 Likes
İm just wondering why Russia didnt produce Single Seat version of Mig35.
İs there any spesific reason for that?
why, there is a single
Are you sure?
That 35 looks like twin seater version operated by single pilot.
Canopy design is seperated, which indicates its a twin seater version.
there’s a fuel tank in the back
İnteresting.
Well that explains the canopy design then.
unification
You said that now the 9-12 has become a god among man.
I want the MiG-29 and the F-16 to perform according to their respective manuals. This means that, in configurations of 13000kg (2100kg fuel) for the MiG-29A and 10000kg (1200kg fuel) for the F-16C the MiG-29 will have the instantaneous turn advantage while the F-16C has the rate advantage.
The rate advantage for the F-16C according to the manual at sea level in the above configuration should be better by AT MOST 1 deg/sec in the entirety of the speed envelope from 0kph until the MiG-29 G limit becomes 7.5.
F-16A rate performance should also be slightly lower than the F-16C, while in game it is better in every way.
All of what I said is based on what was written here (use google chrome to translate it if you want to read the whole thing and not just look at charts).
Never said anything about the SMT (always made clear imho it should NOT have been added) and never asked for R-73s.
Do you have a link for the MiG23MLD manual? Cause i never managed to find it online (only found M and ML ones)…
Imho it should not get R-73s, I prefer it to stay 11.3 with the R60Ms, as that is the time frame it belongs to.
Imho the MiG-23Mld is already quite underrated, in AirRB I’ve consistently beaten F-14s with it… never knew it could pull so much more irl htough!
3 Likes
Well, comparing early A models of F-16 to the current 9.13 in-game, their sustained rates are almost the exact same.
The same grace of the F-16 is that it achieves its maximum rate at a higher speed, giving it better abilities to pull an enemy into a manageable aspect. That, and escape any offset rate fights and easily transition into vertical rates from the deck.
The only reason why it doesn’t destroy the MiG-29A in game atm is because of its weaker engine. Top-end power output compared to the F-16C with its F-110-GE is lower, and power loss due to speed is much less of problem on the GE pattern engines than PW… This is ignoring the generation difference, too, and that the 110-GE-129 is better in almost every conceivable way.
The MLD came into service 1984 and was already servicing R-73s at that time. It has no business flying around without them. It’s improved flight performance and the fact that it carried the R-73 should set it apart from the rest of the MiG-23’s but in-game it is actually worse than a MiG-23ML/A for Air RB purposes with (for some reason) worse sustained turn rate.
The MLD manual (23-18) is part of a larger MiG-23ML manual, it encompasses both variants. I do not have the complete manual, trying to track down the remainder.
4 Likes
Sub variants in soviet manuals are just appendixes in preexisting manuals for example the 23-12A radar section is an appendix in the larger 23-12 manual
Im guessing for your report you used that one page that was posted on a russian forum to prove a point a while back?
2 Likes
And supporting articles, yes.
2 Likes
with this and the sheer number of other reports ive done on the MiG-23 series im hoping we get some sorta overhaul for them all at the same time in an upcoming major update with the new correct HUD, correct cockpits, correct AoA, correct IRSTs, and more realistic radar behavior/performance
2 Likes
Highly unlikely there will be physical model changes.
Here is another pic of MiG-23MLD cockpit;
https://cdn.discordapp.com/attachments/1078877088087552102/1159398017300959242/image.png?ex=6530e08b&is=651e6b8b&hm=e042aa90f25e9005848481b4a08d1fb82d3cc55014ad1f14d8fc4830b113e145&