The MiG-29 (9-13) seems to have a significant nerf that affects the airplane’s gameplay, especially considering that this plane often faces top-tier aircraft. For instance, the two engines have too many failures in the game. The Klimov RD-33 engine in the game has a max thrust of 3,920 kgf and an afterburner thrust of 6,980 kgf. According to Western data on the aircraft, the max thrust should be 5,050 kgf, while the afterburner thrust should be 8,320 kgf. Based on these figures, the MiG-29’s engines are inferior even compared to an F-4J in the game. This wouldn’t be a severe issue if the plane fought against these aircraft, but in most matches, the MiG-29 has to fight against planes with Fox-3 and IRCCM missiles, making it significantly inferior at its BR.
I believe the MiG-29 should have the characteristics it deserves in the game, and it should be seriously considered to add the R-73 missile to make it competitive or at least defend itself in dogfights against more technologically advanced aircraft. Additionally, the MiG-29’s radar in the game is an underwhelming fantasy. The MiG-29 9-13 (also known as MiG-29S, though it doesn’t have this designation in the game) should have an instantaneous turn rate of approximately 20 degrees per second and a sustained turn rate of about 15 degrees per second. These values can vary slightly depending on the flight conditions and the aircraft’s configuration, according to sources such as Jane’s All the World’s Aircraft, FlightGlobal, Defensa y Seguridad Internacional, and Globalsecurit
I think it is time to improve the MiG-29 as it should be and to fight with the new generation of threats currently and videos and images that I found I think are evidence of the lost potential of the MiG-29
3 Likes
Mig-29 engines produce well over 11,000kgf of afterburning thrust each in-game. They are not nerfed.
With both Klimov RD-33 engines, the MiG-29 has a total thrust of 16,600 kgf. This gives it impressive maneuverability and combat performance.
Obviously they are nerfed. I don’t know if you have seen the sources that I have passed.
The sources prove that it’s not nerfed.
Mig-29 has an anti-FOD device for takeoff, so on takeoff [which doesn’t matter for dogfights] speeds, the lack of airflow cause less thrust at takeoff speeds.
In-flight however the thrust always correct cause the anti-FOD device is open.
See this:
1 Like
The argument mentions that the MiG-29 has an anti-FOD device that reduces thrust at low speeds (such as during takeoff), but this thrust is normalized in flight because the anti-FOD device opens.
Anti-FOD in MiG-29: It is true that the MiG-29 is equipped with an anti-FOD device that protects the engines from ingestion of foreign objects during takeoff and landing. This device closes at low speeds and opens in flight.
Thrust in flight: Once in flight, the anti-FOD device opens allowing optimal airflow and therefore maximum engine thrust. However, the thrust reduction at low speeds should be negligible during flight, since the anti-FOD device is not active under these conditions.
dditionally, your argument about the MiG-29 engines producing over 11,000 kgf of afterburner thrust in the game might not be accurate. The technical information for the Klimov RD-33 engine on the MiG-29 generally indicates that it produces approximately 8,300 kgf of afterburner thrust per engine. It’s important to verify these figures with reliable sources to ensure accuracy. If the MiG-29’s engines are incorrectly represented in the game with significantly higher thrust values, this could affect the perception of the aircraft’s performance in the game.
Logically, the thrust of the Klimov RD-33 engines of the MiG-29 should be accurately reflected in the game. Here are the generally accepted technical specifications:
Dry thrust: approximately 5,100 kgf per engine. Afterburner thrust: approximately 8,300 kgf per engine.
If the MiG-29 has two Klimov RD-33 engines, each producing approximately 8,300 kgf of afterburner thrust, the MiG-29 should have a total thrust of 16,600 kgf with both engines operating at full afterburner capacity.
“In War Thunder, the engines of the MiG-29 are represented with a maximum thrust of 3,920 kgf and an afterburner thrust of 6,980 kgf. However, this does not match the actual specifications of the Klimov RD-33 engine.
For accuracy, the Klimov RD-33 engines on the MiG-29 should have:
Dry thrust: 5,100 kgf per engine.
Afterburner thrust: 8,300 kgf per engine.
These differences can significantly affect the MiG-29’s performance in the game, especially in terms of acceleration, maneuverability, and combat capability. In the game, the MiG-29 loses to much worse planes, without considering its poor acceleration in certain maneuvers.”
Turbofan engines are tested uninstalled and with optimal airflow for static speeds.
NOT at-speed, or in-aircraft.
There are few companies able to afford to simulate at-speed conditions for at-speed thrust numbers and most don’t provide that information outside charts.
RD-33 engines are correct, and you should research the general subject of turbofan thrust as a whole in the meantime.
OP you are confusing bench thrust with installed thrust
1 Like
the engines of the MiG-29 are represented with a maximum thrust of 3,920 kgf and an afterburner thrust of 6,980 kgf. However, this does not match the actual specifications of the Klimov RD-33 engines.
For accuracy, while the Klimov RD-33 engines on the MiG-29 should have approximately:
- Dry thrust (installed): 4,335 - 4,590 kgf per engine.
- Afterburner thrust (installed): 7,055 - 7,470 kgf per engine.
These values account for the decrease in thrust when the engines are installed in the aircraft and operating under real flight conditions. This reduction is due to factors like aerodynamic drag and environmental conditions.
But really, even if we use different sources for the test benches, according to my calculations, the installed thrust should be as mentioned. However, this is still not represented in the game.
what is the source
chatGPT is not a source
Tell me a source then because the game itself doesn’t know what sources it uses. Also, it helps me calculate faster since I don’t speak native English, so I’m sorry if this bothers you
you’re the one making the claim so you need to provide the source
2 Likes
In any case, you don’t show a single source, so we’re in the same situation.
I already provided the sources. If you want, I can find you the direct link, although I doubt that will change your point of view.
also checked the sources you provided. Besides, my friend, with a basic investigation, you realize that the game simulates the Fulcrum C very poorly.
Problem ain’t the engines. It’s the fact that the MiG-29 absolutely SHITS itself trying to make one turn. From mach 1.10 to 0.8 in mere seconds.
Alvis, those are the Su-27 engines…
I agree that this is also a problem in the game.
