AeriaGloria

Yes. But MiG-29 9.12S also exists, where S upgrade is done in 9.12 airframe without hump

Me EO seems to work automatically in RL or EORL mode. EORL seems to Simply skip memory mode extrapolation and skip straight to EO, so I’ve been using it less for R-27R/ER shots The real Fulcrum only had sensor cooperation if “coop” switch is flipped. In such a case, the radar only works in MPRF mode which has 30 km acquisition and 21 km track range. So to do it realistically in Fulcrum, is complicated

It’s kindve like why they never used the datalink for R-27 T/ET. Sure it “could” have worked if they built them with the reference antennas and made it work with the software. But the sad truth of the Soviet Union is that they didn’t, and I think the they did a pretty good job as is designing a pretty unique missile to have some rather unique abilities (modularity).

I checked guide for MiG-29SMT with Zhuk-ME radar. It can do TWS and provide coordinates to RVV-AE (R-77) and R-73 in such a way as to attack all selected targets. However, if any R-27 variant is selected, it will transition to STT 10 seconds before reaching authorized launch zone. So if it is possible, it is not on the MiG-29SMT

Absurd? It’s impossible I think! Maybe possible if the time was turned back to 1976 and the engineers were able to design it with that intention with extra money and resources. Or if some sort of huge upgrade was announced. But DCS MiG-29 will only be able to guide with STT

The radar itself is also what sends the data link signal. Two 1/3rd second signal periods to provide datalink guidance for up to 2x R-27, and last 1/3rd second target illumination. I would have to check some material, but I believe after a certain period of time the radar sends a seeker lock command and transitions to a more normal illumination waveform with higher update, but I would have to check

It is theoretically possible if the Missile/guidance system was designed that way. As it is, there is no way to fire while maintaining TWS, and the datalink is designed with 1 s update rate. Whereas in TWS, a full scan takes about 3.6 seconds I believe. Im sure it would’ve been possible if the engineers had the money to make it work with their existing hardware which is as you say, already designed for LOAL. But it just wasn’t done. The range is 12 km for small target, 25 km for medium, and 40 for large. These ranges are also drastically smaller if attacked using MPRF/ZPS mode. You would think with comparing to the F-14/Phoenix, that this sort of thing would have been on their mind. But I guess they believed the STT guidance needed for accurate mid course guidance while saving their TWS mid course engineering for R-77, which was notoriously behind schedule

It’s not in the guide, I am referencing real world checklist I likely shouldn’t share here Fuel pumps need battery power to work. So you are checking both batteries and that the fuel pumps work. When you turn on fuel pumps, green annunciator lights above them turn on. So you are checking that both battery and fuel pumps work

It’s in the pre start check list. Step 38, power from battery on. 39. parking break check 40. Service tank 1/2 on Check tank 1/2 lights and battery voltage then turn tank 1/2 off

It’s just how MiG programmed it so you couldn’t accidentally use it while taking off or landing. It’s in the real manual

Who knows if the MiG-29 has enough thrust to balance the drag. All we know is that it’s above the stated limits for the tanks. These limits could be “safe jettison of tank is ensured/tested up to this speed” or it could be “the pylon/connecrion/tank cannot withstand pressure past a certain airspeed,” which is something DCS doesn’t simulate with FC3.

As far as I’ve been able to tell, while it seems possible for the sensor to slew 75 degrees, it can only be aimed 45 degrees before launch. For example, the R-60 on MiG-29 with HMCS seems to have 20 degree off boresight targeting angle even though the sensor can slew 45 degrees. So for some reason, the Soviets/Vympel decided to not take advantage of the whole slew angle for off boresight launches. Perhaps it was for kinematic reasons, or they wanted to make sure the sensor had enough wiggle room to be able to comfortably make off boresight shots without going over any limit. Your guess would probably be good as mine

According to MiG-29 weapon employment manual R-60 work off boresight up to 20 degrees

The one in DCS should be the original with 45 degrees off boresight The Su-27/J-11 can still use IRST up to 60 degrees off boresight, but should still limit R-73 LA to 45 degrees. I can test it in game

They use the same IR suppressor we use in DCS? Do you have a picture of them using a different suppressor?

What’s your loadout? Certain loadout will disable the 5-8 missile stations, 1-4 works with any loadout For example. You cannot carry 2x S-5 in UB-32 pods with 8x ATGM, 5-8 ATGM will not fire. The FCS thinks S-5 is a bomb, and bombs have same restriction

Was learning more about IRST/radar, there’s a “Cooperation” switch in front of the throttle next to air/ground switch and emergency rocket release. This switch forces the radar into medium prf. In this mode only do you get both sensors working together, if radar lock drops then it is maintained with IRST and radar/laser ranging; or if IRST lock drops it is maintained with radar. In close combat mode and gun mode the IRST is main station with radar used if IRST won’t lock, and in helmet/phi-o both are used simultaneously and the first to lock on becomes primary. If target is being tracked by IRST with this switch on, a second press of the lock on button will transition to Radar STT while continuing back up support by IRST In order to do HPRF search this “Cooperation” switch must be turned off. Which is unfortunate but makes sense since the IRST has a nominal range of 12-18 km, which is pretty neatly within MPRF range of 12-30 km (tracking). You would rarely be able to properly use IRST as a backup at the ranges the HPRF would work (25-55 km for tracking.). However, this section seems to affirm that when using IRST tracking with quasi continuous radar ranging, there will be no IFF indication. Which would mean you would need a temporary radar lock and disable in order to verify IFF. Oddly enough, this same switch seems to enable or disable the calculations for high drag bombs when in air to ground bombing mode…. Of note, I cannot figure out the WCS selector (left of HUD) and Radar selector (in front of throttle below delta H selector). Both have a close combat switch. Only WCS has Opt/Phi-0 modes. I wonder if since IR is selected before these modes on WCS selector, IR is only sensor for OPT/Phi-0, and radar selector only works when WCS is In Radar position. And that the only way to use radar for Opt/Phi-0, is with this Cooperation/High drag switch EDIT: after reading employment manual, it seems WCS needs to be on radar to use radar selector settings. Selecting close combat/Helmet/Opt/Phi-0 on WCS is purely for IRST UNLESS you select Cooperation/Interaction/High drag switch, OR if you have a radar guided weapon (R-27R, perhaps ER) selected. Either way, interesting cooperation of Radar/IRST and switchology. Will be lots of fun

From reading Mi-24V manual book 1 dated 1987 this seems to be the case. Intended procedure is to heat audio signal first using SPU-8, then switch to COMPASS for guidance to the beacon once you hear the correct audio signal

Is your gun on? Weapons powered up?

It should be an axis; and if closer to a certain end or middle tells the missile the target is small/medium/large

As mentioned. It’s setting wingspan for gun use. However for missiles, it does something else. If correctly modeled in game, it will define when the radio correction of the R-27R/ER is expected to end and seeker lock on to begin. For expected seeker lock on its small it’s 12 km (usually dusted for cruise missiles) medium is 25 km, large is 40 km So usually it’s stuck at medium intended for fighter sized targets. It also sets fuse delay, it seems, the smaller the target, the less delay after the fuse “sees” something. I’m sure the intention here is to get the missile to explode when near the center of the target, not just when it detects the nose or tail

Honestly the F-4 with AIM-7M isn’t probably far off from MiG-29 9.12 with R-27R. The closer you get the bigger the advantage to the MiG. Though I think the MiG-23ML is a very worthy opponent for F-4 with AIM-7M, 29 9.12 with 27R improves on it capabilities in some more evolutionary then revolutionary ways, with the focus being on dogfighting with 29 As said, F-14 with AIM-7, even Phoenix A, or Mirage 2000C are good opponents. F-15 with AIM-7 would be a close fight I think, F-15 would have quite the BVR edge with its large radar.

First stage is ICS, second stage is radio. That’s what radio trigger does

I am aware of all these charts and manuals, I have read Mi-24A/D/V/P and 35M manuals ranging from 1976 to 2011, believe me, I am aware of these. This chart does not say the governor changes the RPM it holds, only that at takeoff power, to expect it’s rpm to be on the lower side as you are pushing the limit of the engine. There is no “switch” in the system that changes the governor RPM based on power level. You can fly in DCS plenty on takeoff power with 95% rotor rpm or higher, but it’s often on the lower end becuase you are pushing your engine to limit and it can’t always give more to balance the increasing drag of more rotor pitch. In that chart, the manual is telling you what to expect on average, not that the governor lowers rotor rpm automatically when you enter takeoff power I only mention the turbine adjust rpm and transient torque as potential causes for why you see rotor rpm as low 87-88% in flight. Outside of those, in steady state conditions, the governor will command max engine power below 94% and command less engine power above 96%, trying its hardest to keep rotor rpm in that 95% +/-1-2% range as much as it can and this is what you see in DCS also.

I’m sorry, I didn’t mean to imply that anti ice used more power over time, it was not a mistake to leave it on. Just that it means you have nearly 20% less power going to your engines, so you get low rotor rpm much easier from the less power. Less power going to rotor = less collective pitch can be used Currently in DCS, the right engine decreases in power from anti ice much more. I’m not sure if that’s accurate, but that’s why EPR and PTIT will show different values for them. There are great hover charts that show how much altitude and temperature gives you hover performance, but they are not for anti ice Charts are from Chucks guide