Idk dude the only thing i see is a grown man crying and whining.
2 Likes
-
Ad hominem, big surprise lol
-
Given the disparity between your RUS/US stats i’m shocked you haven’t come to the same opinion, unless you are willfully ignorant, or biased.
Funny how you bothered enough to check my stats, looks like someone’s mad lmao. Big surprise coming from the biggest crybaby ever.
3 Likes
-
ad hominem again lmao
-
its a shame you cant be taken seriously, you have the vehicles and play time to be worth talking too
1 Like
There’s no point in talking seriously with you, all you do is cherrypick specific tanks or planes to sustain your “russian bias” tiring narrative (while there are lots of broken vehicles in every single tree and BR range) which only serve to harm serious debates on fixing broken vehicles. When someone tries to make a counterpoint you simply ignore the argument and keeps whining and crying, like you did when i showed Russia winrate to you, not to mention your long history of doomerism/negativity on the forums. I can’t do anything but make fun of you, unfortunately.
3 Likes
reality would harm your chosen perspective, therefore reality is tiring…
lmfao
1 Like
This F-15C equivalent fighter can come at any time.
Definitely worth the wait.
Though I’d prefer the Mig-29K due to it being lighter, both are part of peak Mig-29.
3 Likes
This plane doesn’t really have anything magically advanced thought, the avionics are the same of the SMT (worse if we consider the early prototypes), and the flight performance would put it on par with other 4th gen aircraft.
Also it’s not some magical unifinished prototype, the 155 and 156 aircraft were completely finished in terms of:
Having all the avionics (radar, rwr, irst etc.)
Having fired in tests all the weapons it had…
Having countermeasures installed
And in the case of the 156 (the prototype in suggestion)
It had the final finished cockpit (basically same cockpit of the SMT)
and especially production tools were ready to mass produce completely identica copies of it.
This aircraft basically is neither overpowered (at least unless they give it a bs flight model),
nor a prototype where we have to guess some of the things it could use and some of the things it could carry.
4 Likes
Both MiG-29Ks (9-31 and 9-41) are not lighter
Not lighter but lacks the hump and has better engines with two extra pylons
nicee
1 Like
This article also claims the L-150 pastel for the later prototypes MiG-29M (Fulcrum E) :: Ruslet .
Yefim Gordon’s book also claims that:
6 Likes
Lately I’ve been trying to find footage of an air show/display of the MiG-29 showing how much more maneuverable it would be, especially at low speed.
TBF it’s been a struggle to find videos of the aircraft flying.
Until is stumbled upon a French documentary including why seems to be the 9.15 in the part corresponding to the presentation talking about it. Time code is 45:05 to 48:40.
I do think it’s the 9.15 due to better display of maneuverability and camo being the same as the 156, down to the flag + dogtooth elevator.
Correct me if I’m wrong, I think it has its place in the thread ;)
4 Likes
Did a light skim over the comments but haven’t seen anyone ask this yet:
Why can it only carry 2 R-27ER/ET missiles but 4 R-27R/T missiles?
Regardless, major +1, as it would actually make for a highly competitive Flight Model MiG-29 (and they tend to be quite lackluster in my experience)
Generally because of a weight restriction on certain pylons
3 Likes
Beautiful video! Yes it’s definitely a MiG-29M 9-15!
4 Likes
Other 2 people liked it, now you can like it too :D
4 Likes
I love how successful this suggestion is, 94% acceptance is no joke. I’ve seen multiple ppl that aren’t even Russia mains getting excited with the possible addition of this plane.
We’ll get it soon 🙏
6 Likes