Top Jockey

Thank you for the chart Hummingbird - preciselly the kind of info I want to compare between the 2 of them ! Is there any chart of this type for the MiG-29A also ? Ironhand, always nostalgic to see a great classic, Su-27 training tutorial from LOMAC ?

You're right Yo-Yo ... and that's what I've been saying all along - since post #31 on this thread: - 3500 lbs internal fuel for the Fulcrum - roughly 3 mins. full AB; - 5200 lbs internal fuel for the Flanker - roughly 3 mins. full AB. So, can you share some light about the maximum attainable values of ITR and STR for the MiG-29 and the Su-27 (without Direct Control mode) ? (Basically what I ask on post #131.)

Thank you Ironhand. For #1, what I meant was: for the middle diagram in image below, the fighter in blue arrow / trajectory, should be traveling faster (higher speed), correct ? (I ask, because that's what I believe is happening when both the MiG and the Sukhoi fly at roughly the same STR, as the MiG-29 does have a smaller turn radius.) On #3 I understand, although I believe that with "Direct Control" (S key), the Su-27 pitch rates (and also the ITR) are considerably higher than 33 º / sec... they get crazy.

Come on all of you - my good jet fighter knowledgeables people, help me out with post #131, if you will. So one can finally have a solid idea of what the MiG and Sukhoi can do - I'm just asking about turn performance. Do you find the Su-27 values somewhat inflated ? Can the MiG-29A achieve higher values ? Thank you.

Hello everyone, I've been flying the MiG-29 again, and I seem to be improving even a bit more with it in DACM. However I do have some questions, related to the above data from @Ironhand, at the above conditions: 1 - at the Sustained Turn Rates, if the Su-27 is attaining similar STR with the MiG-29, but the Su-27's turn radius is bigger, then so is its speed higher, correct ? 2 - does anyone know the absolute maximum ITR and STR values for both jets (sea level, clean config, low fuel) ? (Searching the web, for the MiG I see frequently: 22º or 23º / sec for STR, and 28º / sec for ITR.) 3 - do the values below from "Andraxxus" (12th post), for ITR and STR for the Su-27 and the MiG-29, make sense for you ? Su-27S : ITR - 33,45º / sec Su-27S : STR - 25,91º / sec MiG-29A : ITR - 28,57º / sec MiG-29A : STR - 22,94º / sec https://www.key.aero/forum/modern-military-aviation/134062-fighter-agility

Just my opinion but, I don't know if aerobraking is a common practice on the MiG-29. As in its case a tail strike is more likely to happen when comparing to other types, given the low clearance from the exhaust nozzles to the tarmac...

Hello Yo-Yo, That isn't the point. The point is; regardless of the way the aircraft is landed, for the majority of people the exaggerated bouncing behavior of the front landing gear is not correct / realistic.

Very good and valid points there. However one feels that because of those circumstances at Desert Storm, the Tomcat was somewhat denied the opportunity to show its full potential... But could the Eagle's radar (from that era) detect and lock onto a given target, from as far as the Tomcat's AWG-9 ? Besides, neither the Eagle's AIM-7 or AIM-120 had the reach of the Tomcat's AIM-154. (Ok, I know the AIM-120 is more maneuverable and reliable against fighters.) Regarding 9 G's and T/W, I remember reading that, Eagle pilots admited that even the F-14A could give them problems when fighting low and slow. Was the F-14 and E-2 Hawkeye coordination / performance that much below the F-15 and E-3 Sentry ?

... that's a debatable claim. Why is it better than the F-14B, for instance ?

This ^

Also because at the time, there were border overflights by MiG-25's from the USSR, and the F-14 / AIM-54 combo proved the best interception system the US was offering.

Not that I have any particular difficulty in landing any DCS / 3rd party aircraft (yeah, I'm that good :D), but by mere curiosity: How do other aircraft (F-14, F-15, F-16, Mirage, MiG-21, Su-27, etc) react when flying into the runway carelessly ? Does any of them bounce up so hard like the MiG-29 ?

Thanks to its LERX structures ?

You mean the TF-30. Besides, the Tomcat was designed as fighter also, and not just an interceptor.

Actually, from several DACM I've done in DCS, I've found the F-15C maneuvering at low speed very good. (Between several different types, each with 2 short-range AAMs, and each with the respective fuel quantity for roughly 4 -5 minutes on full afterburner.) At the least the F-15's pitch rates are more impressive than the MiG-29's (because of its AOA / G limiter), and maybe a little bit higher than the F-14's. (It seemed to move its nose around with more freedom of movement than the MiG.) So regarding low speed maneuverability, are you refering to the F-15's sustained turn rate ?

I'm not sure, but eitherway the nose keeps being pulled down, and the aircraft will oscillate a lot more with the AP reset enabled. Be my guest, no problem at all - I appreciate everyone's insight. And in some part you are probably right also. Even more, if one does pay attention to the different airframes behavior, things tend to match up: - the MiG-29 does pull its sustained turns at a somewhat higher AOA than the Su-27... which means more drag.

I know it, the point is: In DCS I always felt that pratically every aircraft (F-15, F/A-18C, Su-27, etc) does have better pitch rate and nose pointing authority than the MiG-29, (except the F-16 obviously). (In which before experimenting in DCS, I always expected the MiG-29 to be more like an F/A-18C maneuvering wise, from all the literature one reads.) And its tendency to bleed speed easier than others when turning. But the reasons are long known: - its AOA limiter which instantly pulls its nose down; (I fully understand its purpose, however I don't like it - I'm trying to put my gunsight on the bandit, and the aircraft itself is trying to pull the nose down when I relax a bit on the stick...) - lack of unstable configuration design (like the Su-27 or F-16).

Well, after some months without touching the MiG-29, I've been flying it againg since yesterday. Again, in the exactly same conditions (saved mission), against the AI's JF-17 as stated here before. And I got better (getting on the AI's JF-17 six o-clock easily), guess how ? Basically by flying the MiG-29 like an F-16; which is trying to keep an energy fight and not an angles fight. Which, for the MiG is to keep a sustained turn rate, of roughly 700 kph speed, before closing the remaining angles for the shot. And obviously like several of you already mentioned here and for the known reasons, it can bleed speed somewhat faster than the Su-27 when pulling G's / AOA.

Yep, you really should have read the thread from the start, like @draconus recommended. Because pratically everything about this stuf, has been talked about from the start.

Great read ! Judging by the report from the Libyan MiG-23 pilot above, although the Tomcat had somewhat superior ACM characteristics, the MiG-23 apparently could give it a hard time also.

I wouldn't do it, that's how I broke mine.

Hats off, that DOES take skill ! :thumbup:

Thank you BarTzi - numbers and gray rectangles gone from the NSAWC livery ! (Also tried with the Portuguese Air Force livery, and it works 5 stars now.) My previous error, I was placing all the "strings" before the "name" tag, and not after it - as it should be. Many thanks and @Twister312 also. :thumbup:

No joy. I'll post the two .lua files I've changed according your recomendations. Their respective folders are: C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\CoreMods\aircraft\F-16C\Liveries\F-16C_50\default C:\Program Files\Eagle Dynamics\DCS World OpenBeta\CoreMods\aircraft\F-16C\Liveries\F-16C_50\F-16A NSAWC Desert description1.lua description2.lua

Well... now that I look at the folder hierarchy closelly, let me ask : Shoulg those changes be done at the "descriptiom.lua" of the respective add-on livery, or at the one in the "default" F-16 folder ?