Imagine saying the Source is not a primary source, when its literally from, Naval Air Systems Command, 47123 Buse Road, Building 2272 Suite 540, Patuxent River, MD 20670 , you are doing some massive Coping. You think this stuff is fake now, or that the place putting this information out is also fake?
Read where the information stated is coming from, and then note that they note that it’s incongruent with the (then) still classified (secret) sources. They’re telling you it’s not accurate in the document, it’s not my opinion. It’s just fact.
Oh but when you literally " make up graphs " about flight models of say… the MIG 29 we should go off what you make, but information released by a freedom of information act isn’t real because you can’t find it?
2 Likes
Please quote when I made up a FM graph for the MiG-29?
I have it, but the document shared is sufficient. It states quite clearly that the F-14 NATOPS is incongruent with still “secret” sources.
???
I made a colored overlay to depict the flight envelope of supermaneuverable aircraft, and I input limits such as 60 degrees for MiG-29 since that’s when airflow separation over the wing occurs per director of TsAGI. I didn’t make it up. Thanks for reminding me to share that source link.
What are you confused about in relation to that statement? You can obtain the full document, I just don’t have it at the moment. Nor is the full document necessary to prove my point.
the graph you made is for the MIG 29, where in the PDF does it state its talking about the Mig 29?
Yes, quite explicitly discusses it’s departure tolerant design (opposite of the effects we have in-game currently where it enters unrecoverable flatspins in a single turn / deviation from normal sustained AoA).
what page is the mig 29 mentioned on this pdf.
2-6, page 7 in the pdf
Though it’s discussing qualities of supermaneuverable aircraft in general, hence why I applied the characteristics that fit the MiG-29 to the chart so it could be used as a visual reference when describing the issues it has in-game currently.
@sartt My information on MiG-29 is well sourced from manuals and documents.
I’ll refer to a couple more if you want to read further but let’s move the discussion thereafter to the relevant MiG-29 thread if possible.
So you are basically making stuff up, and trying to apply it to the MIG 29 because you want it to fit to the mig 29. Gotcha. You see this is why i stopped listening to people on the forums when the MIG 19 Came out, and people said it was " historically accurate " meanwhile it was super cruising something that it could not ever do in IRL, and these people pulled out all type of fake made up graphs to prove a point. If you cannot find me a document stating the MIG 29 can do what you want to believe it can do, or something from the soviet air force stating this, i don’t care what graph you make.
Show me a graph from the Russian Air Force that is identical to the graph that you made Also why is that PDF talking about Thrust Vectoring??? The mig 29 had Thrust Vectoring???
High Maneuverability. Theory and Practice | AIAA SPACE Forum this is 1 page, not showing any graphs but stating the mig 29 can do it, without stating its fuel load, or if the plane had weapons. this wouldnt even be considered by gaijin as a primary source. Its from a tech expo, where as im getting my source from the actual U.S Naval command. Gaijin doesn’t care if you post sources from 1 page expos.
Actually ill even say the Mig 29 can do what your graph says it can do, but gaijin isn’t going to accept that. Trust me, i;ve gotten sources directly from the U.S Military stating the M1A2 SEP had Depleted Uranium in it s Hull and Turret, and gaijin doesn’t care and its from Sources approved for release.
Every single thing I was discussing was sourced in my report…
I can show you videos, pictures, etc… what is the issue?
I actually shared a document from the director of TsAGI which is the primary aerospace and aircraft design bureau in Russia that made the basic design from which the MiG-29 and Su-27 were required to use and based on. He’s the leading expert in Russia on such things.
The Eastern countries do not use “EM” graphs the same way western countries do, but sure… here is a graph highlighted for your convenience…
It is an entire document, you just do not have access to view the entire thing. Gaijin and myself on the other hand do, and the information was forwarded. They are going to be making some small changes to the FM to correct the inability to recover from spins and allow 60 degree AoA because of the reports.
There are no reliable sources stating the SEP has DU in the hull AND turret because the SEP DOES NOT have DU in the hull.
We’ve been instructed not to cite ODIN in our own military studies, thesis, etc. It’s not a reliable source, some human resources personnel likely wrote that after perusing wikipedia.
Also, the USMC NEVER received any SEP package M1A2.