The MiG-29 has a nerf to its engines that lacks explanation in the game

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

1 Like

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

3 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.

2 Likes

ajfwe
F16 vs Mig29 drag polar
image

1 Like

Alvis, those are the Su-27 engines…

I agree that this is also a problem in the game.

https://www.mediafire.com/file/9j6g2e5ee881zyn/Практическая+аэродин...pdf/file

1 Like

Bild_2024-12-05_175036650


1 Like


image



2 Likes

Thing is, the mig29 loses even to the f16c in a dog fight in both 1 circle and 2 circle. The engines should definitely be given their actual thrust, the mig29 is miserable to play at the moment