They’re not out-rating the 9-13.
GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 Flight Manual Mig-29 literally have to just read 1st page.
Superior guns only fighter maybe/probably, as rate fighting is the most important ability in a guns only if both pilots are competent. Still the difference should be much less, and the MiG-29 should always get the first few turns.
In an HOBS fight MiG-29 is simply better, just like the hornet.
At least the MLA it absolutely is
I’d argue that the MiG-29 is better off in a dogfight than the F-16 especially if they start with altitude. There is just few opportunities for the F-16 to shake him off the bat even in guns only… in-game the MiG-29 stands no chance.
We can test it in a custom if you want, I promise you the 9-13 isn’t being out-rated.
Yes, gotta do it right now tough as I’ll go to bed in about 20 mins (1:25am in Italy now)
Already online in game btw
Exactly! We are making progress!
Note that when you go into the F-16 thread, you won’t find the players in there insisting that it needs to pull better AoA to compete with the MiG-29.
Yeah I thought as much but wanted to confirm. So 1994 then, not 2001. Less than 4 years after ex-soviet Germany was reunited with West Germany. Definitely the most reliable of sources.
I was warned on the old forums for posting an F-16A manual which was the top result on google, but I’m not surprised there are different rules for Western and Russian jets.
You want me to explain to you why sustained turn rate doesn’t tell you everything there is to know about a fighter jets flight characteristics? Thanks, but no thanks. You struggled enough with basic aerodynamics and gravity, I don’t have the patience to try explaining a more difficult topic.
You accuse other people of adding ‘conditionals’, but you’re the one who moves the goalposts. I understand misinformation and gaslighting tactics come first nature to your type, but you’re not pulling the wool over anyone’s eyes.
A terrible opinion.
I jokingly asked if we could also have you banned from that thread because I didn’t want to have to see the sewage that you spew forth, but you think I’m upset you ignored me? Just because I reply to the drivel you post doesn’t mean I want to see any more of you. I’m just jealous that the German players supposedly managed to have you kicked from their EF thread.
Make sure to post the results with your humble pie.
Can you read im on about russia mains constantly complaining there plane ain’t the best im a british main
Looks like the MiG-23 series is out-rating the MiG-29 9-13 currently, interesting. Thanks for the tests!
Glad you’re learning.
Yes, they’re not complaining because it’s overperforming currently and a few of us are trying to get it back to down to earth and realistic levels of performance.
Yes… NATO is reliable.
The Bundeswehr literally published it on google themselves. It’s not just a random website hosting a leaked restricted document.
You think mass has anything to do with velocity without a conditional lol
Pointing out inaccuracies and reporting them isn’t pulling wool. It’s literally just applying the same standard across the board. You scream of bias, but vehemently refuse to report broken US / British stuff and cry wolf when the Russians want their own stuff fixed (and it’ often requires several waves of buffs because less information is available initially).
This is the derailment you were hoping for, so I’m gonna leave it here. Let the mods deal with your behavior as they did the others who came in here to derail previously.
1 Like
Hey everyone, why do we keep researching for stuff, doing calculations and trying to search for western sources when we can and to spending time to translate to English Soviet manuals when we have @SlowHandClap here, who is a more reliable source than the entities that made/operated the aircraft themselves
5 Likes
U are welcome :D
1 Like
It’s not worth it @SlowHandClap can’t even read ny posts correctly so how is he gonna read yours (ps lovely work)
1 Like
You can thank @Giovanex05 and @BBCRF mostly. They did the brunt of the work on the MiG-29. I just did some very basic reporting on the high alpha… the real difference will be made when Gio’s report is passed.
That wasn’t directed at you, I was just agreeing with you.
NATO doesn’t have a dreadful combat record which contradicts their claims.
Woah. Look forward to seeing you submitting your bug report on the mig-23 overperforming.
Sorry im very drunk must of misread i love the mig29 even though i don’t have it and think its fl8ght model shouldn’t of been nerfed so bad (ps its my favourite looking aircraft ever)
You thought that mass doesn’t impact terminal velocity of a falling object. Ironically the only “conditional” where that is true is in a vacuum, which is not relevant to any of the discussions we have had. Keep moving those goalposts though, maybe one day you’ll stumble upon a good argument.
Yeah the tornado is wiping lobby’s
This keeps getting further and further away from what was actually said and the intended purpose of the statement (an exaggeration). You’re here to derail, it is what it is. We can’t help you, you can’t stop them from fixing the flight models of these aircraft even if you’d prefer they stay the way they are.
It’s overperforming? We know the MiG-29 is underperforming, MiG-23’s appear to match the sustained turn charts at the similar sweeps and test points in the manual. I’ll retest tomorrow and share the results if you’d like.
Mig 29 fm should be better it is lovely but not that mudh as a lot Russian mains say it is a brick (its not)