CrazyGman

So I'm not sure if this is the case with all the current aim-9s, but right now in the Mirage F1 if you take off cold or with a new rearm, ever since the Wednesday update on April 10th the AIM-9B will have no standby growl sound when you select them or go into close combat mode. however the growl does come back on as soon as the missiles detect a heat source, and then the standby low growl tone comes back, and stays on like it should.

I'm surprised the heating standby mode of the 3 way radar energized switch is still bugged and not fixed as this has been a day one problem since early access started. In it's current state with the radar in this mode targets can be detected and seen on the radar screen, and locked (although no icon shows on the hud, and no weapons can be guided) and the detected planes own RWR i believe cannot detect the the F1 radar emissions (because in this mode there are no emission) yet as mentioned there are contact returns from these "non-emissions" visible on the screen that can then be locked. I get that we've all become used to it, but I don't think we need to wait for the complete radar overhaul to have had this long persisting bug fixed by now.

Yeah I did, you still have over 50 seconds of fuel with full burner even with the startup and full loadout. Once you finish the climb the acceleration to supersonic is less then 10 seconds. By that intercept profile you still have around 400 liters of fuel in the tank by the time you hit supersonic at 10 km altitude But you won't pass mach 1.4 before the tank is empty. also above 30,000 feet the might be problems with the fuel flow from the centerline tank, as is stated in the german manual.

Hardly...i tested it in game, max burner all the way struggling to keep it below 0.9 even in the climb to 30,000 feet, it still has a full minute worth of fuel in the centerline tank at full burner. It doesn't run out till i'm 40km away from my starting position at full burner the whole time with the climb to 30,000. Again based on it's role, and compared to the limits of the MiG-21, and the other fighters before it, it seems at odds with the rapid response point defence interceptor.

So which is it then? Do we have conflicting information, or is something being misread. I'm inclined more that the 1.5 is more accurate, as fast interception is kinda the MiG-29s thing, and the MiG-21 didn'f have a speed restruction below mach 1 for it's external tanks, and i'm pretty sure neither did the MiG-23. For the external wing tanks I can see it, because those came after the initial design.

Makes sense with the wing tanks that were a later addition. Not that i plan to use the gun with the tank attached, but why is the gun restricted, and why does a hole matter?

Yeah I was a bit dubious of this source, but I'm wondering where they got that number from

I've read from a source that the MiG-29 with the centerline external tank is limited to mach 0.9 while the external tank is attached, can anyone confirm this?

It would depend if they are doing a scramble mission, then yes. If they are doing a patrol with Flankers, I would actually expect the MiG-29 to be high, to help it remain on station for a length of time closer to the Flanker, unlike the F-16 the MiG-29 is actually pretty good cruising at high alt with the bigger wing, and flying body, while the F-16 has to end up sometimes using afterburner to maintain speed up that high. especially if it's the block 50s with the GE engine, and the higher bypass the works a bit better at low alt then the Block 52 which is a bit better suited for high alt.

See I thought so, I had heard similar interview and references, and so was a bit unsure, because if you look at just on the development side then it seems the answer is no, but there are numerous anecdotes, on them training using the ER/T/and ET.

Based on previous implementaions. Like waypoints for the viggen data-cartage, and other changes you can do on the ground on your kneeboard like the laser code for weapons, i would be very surprised if this was not implemented .

For me it's about immersion. I actually like it when tweaks are made on a module that actually make the system less effective. Like the changes to the radar in the Mirage 2000. Currently the FC3 radar (while good for the time it was developed) is now very behind with what DCS is currently working with. Locking up targets in the MiG-29 currently feels lacking, and the instananeous IFF. requires a large dose of suspension of disbelief. I suspect that there will be some tweaks to the flight model, like the negative effects of having only one R-27 missile on one wing and it limiting your max AoA allowed. IMO it going to make the module feel more alive, and closer to an actual simulator, which is the appeal fans are looking for.

Yeah I wasn't quite sure about the ER, but I had conflicting information on it as operators of the the 9.12 and the 9.13 without the upgraded radar have been shown with it on the pylons and it had been referenced. Going back on my sources you do seem to be correct that none of the IR versions are available with the 9.12s base radar though

IIRC R27RE and RT do not require the upgraded radar, there is no major difference in the seeker, it's just an increased rocket booster, and the original radars were built with the ability to recognize this option when the missile was put on the pylon and adjust the launch parameters shown on the HUD

We look to be getting a 9.12 variant that was the Soviet fighter. So the one given to Russian and all the Soviet states. So that means no internal ECM unit, and it looks like we won't yet be getting lazur-m implementation (GCI Datalink) off the get go, but maybe at a later date. to use the R-77 we would have to be getting the 9.13 variant that had the upgraded radar (only a handful of those), so were not getting any R-77, though all flavors of R-27 that we currently have in game are up for grabs including the ER and ET varients i believe. After some responses and myself re-evaluating the info It looks more just like the R-27R and maybe the ER (which they could kinda trick the old system to use). At least on release, we'll see how things go. in terms of Meta, the MiG-29 even a base R-27R 9.12 Fulcrum will fit right in with the M2000C, F-14, MiG-23, F-4E, Mirage F1, A7 and A6 and AV-8B night attack and F/A-18C and F-15E armed with Sparrows only, and F-16 armed with only Aim-9s. This fits right in with a cold war gone hot scenario in the late 80s and there are already servers like Enigmas cold war, and tempest that are already gearing up for these planes. If datalink sharing is disabled on the servers this puts everyone with a decent amount of stuff. that can compete pretty well together.

it would still be a 9.12 or 9.13 Ukraine was a Soviet state, and so got the good version. Fulcrum Harm

Ahhh I can see now why they pumped the brakes on the "coming in 2024" It would be one thing if they were just adding clickable cockpit, and more fidelity to the sensors, but if they are building from the ground up, that will take some time.

Yeah , i kinda figured, i mean the external model already has bendy wings and is at a pretty decent standard, possibly the exterior pilot model though could use tweaking.

Currently the FC3 MiG-29A we have in game, seems to be in a pretty good state for it's exterior model, and even the interior model having a few buttons and switches move. I know the flight model is also the most currently updated amoung the FC3 aircraft. My question is, are a lot of the current assests for the FC3 MiG-29A going to be used for the full fidelity model, or is the aircraft going to be redone from scratch with a completely new model, and systems?

It would be awesome if it was, a tactical commander could then guide multiple flights himself to what he see's would be the best position

Think of it like the battle of Brittan with the big table, except the ground controller can phisically move you himself by transmitting waypoints via a datalink to your autopilot, and it's linked and corrordinated with the SAM batteries as well. You and your team are then put in the most advantageous position, and the target you are prosecuting is marked on your hud without you having to have your radar on. Once your in range to engage the target, you take over the final part of the intercept, your radar is already dialed onto the target and you turn on your radar to lock your target then release your weapons, and follow up if it's required and after shooting down 1-2 planes you head back home. It's basically what the Soviet defensive strategy was, and what they figured was the best way to quickly organize and coordinate assests, to counter penetrating air attacks over their very large landmass which was also surrounded on pretty much all sides where the enemy could attack from. In theory if someone was to develop it with combined arms, you could in Multiplayer have someone in the tactical commander slot take control of your jets if you allowed them and try to steer a flight of you and your teamates into the most advantageous position, which would actually be kinda cool Anyway the good part of the system is it drastically reduces pilot workload so the pilots can really just be concerned with making sure all systems are working in the aircraft, and fine tuning the sensors so that you can quickly engage your target. The bad part of the system is that the sensor to pilot interface on your aircraft are not really well designed to help give you the best overall SA picture even though they are quite good for target acquisition and guiding weapons, but then that's a problem for ground controller to worry about overall SA. There's a lot of you and only a few of them, and while you are expensive and they want to keep you alive, because there are so many of you, all your training and hours are less then your opponents.

There were 5 Su-34s confirmed lost over Ukraine between Feb 28, 2023 and March 14, 2023. 3 were in the first week alone. What killed them all has not been confirmed in the majority of cases, as with a lot of the combat loses. There were also 4 Su-30s confirmed lost over the same 3 week time frame, and about 8 Su-25s These are just fixed wing assists as well, and the confirmed one. As for the drones, most of those are being shot down well inside Ukrainian lines and as you said if your not worried about a getting smacked down by a retaliatory missile, it's much easier to confirm your kill.

In truth the answer is....we don't know. The Ukrainians claim they did, the Russian's claim they didn't, both sides claim multiple kills that can't be corroberated. In the opening week of the war it was pretty much chaos up in the air with Ukraine ground based air defense significantly compromised in the initial days, and Russian Air power compromised due to a lot of jamming by their own side and friendly fire from their own side. In that environment it is very difficult for the people taking the shots themselves to even fully be sure what they fired hit. However with the chaos Ukrainan fighters did manage to hold the line until their SAM network could come back online, though apparently at high cost. Based on that I would say it's highly likely MiG-29s shot down a few Su-25s or Su-34s doing ground attack that pressed in too deep, and maybe the odd Russian fighter that got out of position. The truth will likely not be known till long after the conflict, with some aspects never being clear just like with all air to air combat.

Thanks for the answer. it's the permanent wing bending effect I was refereing too, and indeed, as you said it's been present for a long time. I don't find it now more prevelant in recent changes, I just never looked hard enough at the full wing to notice the permanent bend, just the control surfaces, where I couldn't see any changes. It was more just a curiosity for me what was actually causing the roll, now I can know what to look for, and it's very cool that this is modeled.

So relatively frequently if I pitch up suddenly at high speed (but not high enough that I rip wings) and usually this is when i'm trying to do a head on gun shot, the result will be that afterwards the aircraft will want to roll strongly to one side or another, and requires a large anount of trim to counteract. I'm just wondering what causes the roll effect, as I can't see any external damage on the aircraft? Is it due to bending the airframe and wings, or is it something to do with the stability augmentation system, now being thrown out of wack? (though there seems to be no way I can find to reset it)