Seaeagle

Oceandar - when did ED ever say that Russian law forbids them from making a DCS Su-27 module? :)

Whats funny is that people keep claiming such nonsense.

Pikey, there is nothing complex about getting a wheel to rotate without "wobbling" - this happens if: a). the pivot point isn't set correctly. b). trying to assign two axis of rotation for the same object - e.g. wheel rotation and steering. The latter is the most common mistake. All you need to do is to separate the functions - e.g. for a vehicle you model axles for the front wheels and then: - animate rotation for the axles. - animate steering for the wheels - link wheels to axles. Problem solved :)

The Russian navy ensign("everyday" flag) is the "Andreevskiy"(see attachment) and, as crazyeddie said, mostly flown from the foremast. The flag in your rendering is only used for special "festive" events(such as port visits).

No only if they miss the wire entirely("bolter"), but as others said, its a different story if the aircraft catches the wire and is slowed down before the wire snaps.

Yes or more specifically, they have an entirely new radar("Zhuk-M") with air-to-surface modes, but also much more capable in air-to-air.

I don't know what ED is up to in this respect, but the only air-to-air weapons the real MiG-29(9.12 and 9.13 for that matter) is compatible with are the R-60M, R-73 and R-27R. The first MiG-29 version capable of using IR and extended range versions of the R-27 + R-77 was the multirole MiG-29M(9.15) in development from the mid eighties. When development of this version was suspended(in 1992), MIG applied these weapons to a MiG-29(9.13) through a radar/WCS modification and designated the new variant "MiG-29S"(9.13S).

On BVR capabilities, one of the Luftwaffe pilots who flew the MiG-29 described the N019 radar as having comparable range performance to the AN/APG-65 radar(that they had in their upgraded F4s), but that it was more cumbersome to use and harder to locate targets with when operated independently(without GCI support). They also found the R-27R missile to be very short ranged, but otherwise having good performance characteristics.

The "MiG-29G" is a modification based on the export version for the Warsaw Pact countries, which aside from a few minor details, was all but identical to the full spec Soviet 9.12(for obvious reasons). The "monkey model" is the 9.12B - a lower spec export version for non-warsaw pact countries.

Well I don't have the latest game version, so I don't know how the MiG-29 versions are simulated currently. Thats why I asked whether the topic concerned this specifically or/and the real aircraft. :)

The MiG-29 does have it, but no it isn't simulated in the game.

You already discovered that in the first paragraph - ABS(Anti-lock Breaking System) and anti-skid are two different terms for the same thing, which works as you described. The MiG-29 has it too.

I meant "cheap and simple" comparably speaking - i.e. compared to the F-15. Ok thanks for the insight :) . I guess my impression of the early days of the F-16 stems from the initial LWF design philosophy - I didn't realise that this was changed to a dual-role concept already before entering production. But you are right that I was looking at it from a European perspective and how we operated it initially - i.e. as a capable yet affordable counter-air platform.

Of course I know that the USAF operates the F-16 primarily in the strike role these days, but its new to me that they had this in mind from day one - are you sure about this basher?. AFAIK the idea behind the F-16 was to complement the expensive F-15 with a simple light AA fighter, that due to a lower cost, could be produced in numbers("hi-lo mix") and thus allow some degree of numerical parity with the the number of such fighters being pumped out "behind the iron curtain". I was under the impression that the structural changes introduced with block 15(also an upgrade) was the first indication that this focus started to change towards a strike role, but that this was first embraced fully with block 25(F-16C) and the block 15 OCU upgrade for the F-16A - which in turn seems to have been the basis for the European -MLU upgrade program.

Real or in game?

Well ok point taken, but define "multirole" :) . The term is sometimes used for any fighter with a limited secondary capability of delivering unguided a2g munitions should the need arise, while at other times(mostly) for a "strike-fighter" with sophisticated sensor fit(onboard or podded) supporting a wide array of guided a2g munitions for various mission types. So while I would agree that my "purely air-to-air" in regards to the initial F-16A was somewhat misleading(i.e. not like the F-15A,B,C,D), it was nevertheless its primary mission - I wouldn't call the original MiG-29 or Su-27S multirole either although they both have some level of a2g capability. In my book, actual multirole focus was introduced with the F-16C line and subsequently applied to the F-16A through upgrades.

Yes we discussed this earlier in this thread: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2721977&postcount=262 https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=2722458&postcount=268 AFAIK all active RDAF F-16s are considered Block 20 F-16AM/BM based on their systems' fit, but while most(some 30 units) were block 15 airframes upgraded to what I listed(in post 262) as the current level, a few were upgraded directly from block 10 airframes to a lower spec level and retained for domestic use.

No Pepin is right - the Su-25 has had AFM since FC1. "AFM" (Advanced Flight Model) was first introduced with the "Flaming Cliffs" add-on and developed specifically for the Su-25T(featured aircraft), but the Su-25 got it as well.

No they upgraded it to MiG-29SM, which in some respects is close to -SMT......but then again not quite :)

Actually we do - at least there is some evidence that it concerns an upgrade to MiG-29SM standard: http://www.migavia.ru/index.php/en/production/the-mig-29-fighters-family/mig-29sm i.e. an upgrade level somewhere between MiG-29S and MiG-29SMT, that can be performed "on location"(I guess depending on the exact composition of the upgrade).

According to US sources, three MiG-29Ks took off from the Admiral Kuznetsov heading towards the Syrian cost - at one point one of them was seen to turn around and head back towards the carrier, but crashed into the sea shortly before or during landing line up. The Russian MoD has confirmed that a MiG-29K has crashed in the vicinity of the Admiral Kuznetsov. The pilot ejected safely and was taken back to the carrier after being rescued by SAR elements.

Yes - its homeport.

There isn't any difference :) . Dedicated commands were introduced in order to accommodate pit builders, as a toggle function is impractical for external devices.

Yes it is a -TM/Su-39.

Photo of MiG-29 flap control panel attached. It is located on the left console and has three pull-buttons for the following positions: "посадка"(landing) "взлет" (take-off) "убраны"(cleared - up) There is no half-way position for the flaps - they are either up or down. However, there are two types of flaps - leading edge flaps(also known as "slats") and trailing edge flaps. During take-off or landing, both are employed and the selected button sets the overall configuration for the respective purpose. When the trailing edge flaps are retracted, the leading edge flaps are operating automatically(controlled by the FCS). So I am guessing that it was a similar deal as with other MiG-29 features - i.e. that still being at FC level of simulation, the half-way flap position was removed because it was an unrealistic feature, while the complexity of the actual functionality wasn't implemented in its place.