Alfa

All three variants(currently in DCS) should have a dedicated cockpit. IMHO there is little point in having three moderately different variants, if those moderate differences aren't replicated. I would suggest: MiG-29(9.12): old style fuel gauge and only compatible with CL tank. No ECM and only the R-27R variant. MiG-29S(9.13S): new style fuel gauge and wing drop tank compatibility. ECM and all variants of R-27 + R-77. MiG-29G(9.12A): either type fuel gauge/with or without ext. wing tanks. No ECM and only R-27R variant. Cockpit with Imperial instruments, German voice warnings and other equipment modifications(graphic representation).

Correct - Lots 10 and 11. Lot 12(1989): Night Attack version introduced - NVG and compatible instrumentation including new HUD, DDIs and MPCD. Not quite - the -402EPE engines were installed on some aircraft in Lot 14(1991), but only became standard fit from Lot 15(1992) yes, but the MPCD was introduced already with Lot 12. From Lot 16(1993) the AN/APG-65 was replaced with the AN/APG-73 and the AMRAAM adopted. Its true that the F-18 was the last to receive the AIM-120 - IIRC integration with USAF F-16s and F-15s occured 1991-92. Yes it was with Lot 18(from fall of 1995).

Here you go(C lots): Lot 10. Blocks 23, 24 and 25. Lot 11. Blocks 26, 27 and 28. Lot 12. Blocks 29, 30 and 31. The Lot XII series F/A-18, introduced in FY90, provided the F/A-18 with a night attack capability. This was accomplished by providing NVG compatible cockpit lighting and displays, a thermal imaging navigation set, digital map set, multipurpose color displays, and a raster HUD. In addition, an independent aft cockpit capability was included for the two-seat F/A-18D (USMC) version. Lot 13. Blocks 32, 33 and 34. The Lot XIII series F/A-18 was introduced in FY91. The enhancements provided by this Lot included the OBOGS, which replaced the lox converter. The NACES and SEWARS were added and armament capabilities were enhanced through the additional hardware provisions for AGM-86 Harpoon and AGM-84 Stand-off Land Attack Missile. The Inertial Navigation System (INS) was also upgraded to the AN/ASN-139 that uses ring laser gyro technology. Lot 14. Blocks 35, 36 and 37. The Lot XIV series F/A-18 was introduced in FY92. This update added full AN/ARC-210 HAVEQUICK/SINCGARS VHF FM Radio provisions to the aircraft and the AN/AAS-38A FLIR/LDT was also incorporated into the F/A-18. Additionally, the Deployable Flight Incident Recorder Set (DFIRS) provides non-volatile storage of the last 30 minutes of flight incident data in a deployable unit. Lot 15. Blocks 38, 39 and 40. Delivered in FY93, the Lot XV series F/A-18 integrated an enhanced engine into the airframe. The F404-GE-400 Power Plant was replaced by the F404- GE-402 EPE. The new engine provided increased power, coupled with reduced fuel consumption. Additionally, the XN-8 Mission Computer and the 91 series Operational Flight Program (OFP) were introduced. Lot 16. Blocks 41, 42 and 43. The enhancements provided by the Lot XVI series F/A-18, which was introduced in FY94, included the integration of the AN/APG-73 Radar Upgrade (RUG) Phase I. The primary improvements provided by the AN/APG-73 RUG Phase I were increased Electronic Counter Countermeasures capabilities, increased memory and processing speed of the signal and data processing functions, and increased receiver bandwidth combining to provide growth capabilities for incorporation of advanced radar modes. The AN/ARC-210 HAVEQUICK/SINCGARS VHF FM Radio was also installed along with the LAU-115 Launcher improvements and incorporation of the 09 (formerly 93) series OFP. Lot 17. Blocks 44, 45 and 46. In FY95, the Cockpit Video Recording System (CVRS) and the AN/AAS-38B Advanced FLIR were introduced. Additionally, there were provisions added for the GPS. Lot 18. Blocks 47, 48 and 49. Lot XVIII series F/A-18 were delivered in FY96 and included the GPS, the AN/ALE-47 Countermeasures Dispensing Set, and a sixth avionics multiplexer bus. Additionally, the 11 series OFP was introduced. Lot 19. Introduced in FY97, Lot XIX series F/A-18C/D Aircraft received a Stores Management System upgrade and an AN/APX-111(V) Combined InterrogatorTransponder (CIT). Lot 20. In FY98, Lot XX series F/A-18C/D Aircraft were delivered, integrating the Phase II AN/APG-73 RUG, ATARS, Joint Direct Attack Munitions, Joint Stand Off Weapon, and EGI to meet the precision navigation capability that future weapon systems require. EGI provides an all-altitude, worldwide source of navigation and attitude information.

@ 1:00 - Commodore Jerry Kid, Royal Navy: "You just cannot do defense on the cheap - what are we going to do.....throw lemons at people?" How about lime fruits? ;)

Not quite the same thing though is it? :) Are you asking why a company, having produced an advanced product, would want to tell anyone about it? - who would otherwise?. My experience is that you are much more likely to find good information from the companies that produce the equipment, than from military/government sources. In the past you could find detailed information on things like Russian radars and other equipment, while lately they all seem to have removed it stating only the most obvious superficial information and that its "world leading" with "no analogues". Of course it could just be down to them all having individually adopted a different policy in this regard, but it does suggest that something else is at play :) .

Looked around a bit and it seems that, at least in regards to the F-15, you were bang on the money :) According to the info I found, the airbrake area of the F-15 is: 31.5 ft² ~ 2.93 m².

Yeah I wouldn't be surprised if they are in that "ballpark".

Who said anything about operational manuals? - there is a difference between no information at all and a complete operator's manual with every system explained in detail and how to operate them. The point was that being old prototypes, there is no current operator to consider in regards to easing on the secrecy. While I agree that the following.. ...is the probable reason for this particular example, there are many other where the relationship between age/operation and declassification is less than obvious. Well it seems to me that pilots with operational experience on the MiG-29 have already been doing that for ages :) . Yes that would help :)

AFAIK on the 9.12B, the RD-33 "combat" regime was removed(engines can only run in "normal" mode), although I suspect that this might have had more to do with warranty - i.e. that the use of "combat" mode is rather detrimental to engine life and comes with heavy restrictions as to how much it can be used. Well I don't know - sometimes that isn't enough. E.g. I have been looking for information on the MiG-29M(9.15)/MiG-29K(9.31) prototypes for ages, but despite these being nearly 30 years old and never put into production - let alone operational service, there is very little information to be found. Whereas with the "baseline" 9.12, you can dig out an amazing amount - e.g. check this page(from a Ukrainian military institute): https://studfiles.net/preview/5383872/ Its a study of the N019(and N001) radar, that goes into such excruciating detail, that you will hardly understand what you are reading, unless you are a qualified radar technician :D

Ah its not that big Mumby :) - I would say that it resembles that of the Hornet both in position and size(well maybe a little bigger). The airbrakes of the Su-27 and F-15 seem larger(I don't know the area of those though). I think the images I posted are distorting relative size somewhat - in the first it looks smaller than it actually is, while in the latter it does look huge. Here is a third one from the side, which gives a better impression:

Heh yeah - well they redesigned the whole aircraft :) . The airbrake is also much larger(with an area of 1 m²), so also has greater effect. You can see it better on this image:

Modern variants have an airbrake like on the Su-27 - i.e. a panel located on the spine, so no problem using it during landing :) Attached example is MiG-29K(9.31).

Well maybe I am wrong, but thats not exactly how I interpret it: The first part talks about thrust adding to aerodynamic lift, while the latter about loss of lift when the gear is raised and ducts are opening...although the thrust increases(?). More like two different effects conspiring to complicate things. :)

I didn't - he did; NP :)

..."and MiG-29S(9-13)" Should be (9-13S). 9-13 did not have the upgraded radar/R-77 compatibility. Yet just a very small nitpick along with the typos - the Su-33 manual description is another matter :D

I am wondering whether there isn't a direct aerodynamic effect involved as well - i.e. as airflow enters the intake duct(instead of passing it), you could imagine that this would cause a "down force" effect.

I think what he meant was that the take-off effects described in the manual would apply to most aircraft - except the one concerning opening of the solid FOD doors. ..for the MiG-29 yes, but not for other aircraft types :)

The MiG-29 has two modes for nosewheel steering - a low(+/- 8 degrees) and a high(+/- 31 degrees) deflection. The low mode is on by default, while in the real jet, you can select the high mode by pressing the "Lock-on" button on the throttle, if the flaps are raised. As draconus said, in the sim the high mode is selected automatically when the flaps are raised. Well you can imagine what will happen if the nosewheel deflects much during high speed take-off/landing runs - so I think the steering angle is tied to flap position because flaps are used on both occasions :) The nosewheel brake is also automatically disabled when the high gain steering mode is activated.

Thats interesting - I never realised that the -R1 was improved compared to the original. Thanks :) .

No FOD protection and Ramps are two different things. The "ramps" form a variable wedge inside the inlet ducts in order to regulate airflow to the engines. The gauge in question indicates the different stages of wedge extension - basically retracted at slow speed to fully extended(at > M1.5 IIRC). At take-off/landing the gear is extended and thus the FOD protection system active - there is an indication of this on the Ramp gauge, because the ramp position reacts to the changed airflow with the FOD doors closed/aux. intakes open.

Ah yes of course - no tailfin root extensions with the CM dispensers like on the 9.12. Like I said - my brain is on vacation at the moment :D .

Yes they indicate LEF state. Yes but they just changed to the new one - give them a little time to change it :) There is no FOD state gauge - there is the gauge(entitled: "КЛИН") indicating ramp state, which(unlike on the Su-27) has an indication for take-off/landing mode(FOD system active) at the top("ВП").

But thats just the export variant of the missile isn't it? By default or by modification? Yes I remember reading an article by a Luftwaffe MiG-29 pilot, saying that their aircraft weren't compatible with the -T. Interesting - didn't know that :) Well yes but by "combat aspect", I was referring specifically the the WCS/armament :) .

Yes and thats what confused me, because this button is not on the MiG-29 throttle. Yes but that for the CM dispenser and I couldn't really see how this could have an alternate function as pylon selector. I have seen the switch panel by the chute button a thousand times while working on my cockpit model, so I really don't know how I could forget about it. I don't know what the deal is with the second throttle pic though - looks weird, but maybe you are right that its from an early MiG-29.

Yes of course :doh: - don't know where my brain is at the moment. Thanks for coming to the rescue Askerov24 and Vatikus :)