LO's MiG-29

[Vekkinho]

The Thunderbirds lost one F-16 recently (in 2002-2003 I think) due to mechanical problems.

No, that was human factor. Pilot forgot to adjust altimeters and during the split S bought the farm.

 

Yup, both Russian and American planes participate at same airshows under same rules of conduct and safety. So if MiGs and Suhois fly high alpha, tailslides, cobras I see no reason for Americans not to do the same.

 

I'm not saying it's impossible for F-15, F-16 and F-18 to preform such high alpha stuff but I don't think it was practiced enough in USAF,NAVY and Marnies. American airpower is a complex thing and their tactics are complex too. You'll see that in many airstrikes in last 20 years American pilots flew along entire net of strategic equipement. AWACS, Elint, Prowlers, NAVSAT, U-2...you name it..they've got it. So pulling cobras and doing tailslides isn't necesarry in those cases. However, Russias recent engagements in Afganistan and Chechnya had much smaller air campaign without technical birds flying around.

 

If you visit any Russian Airbase you'll notice WW2 equipment still useful there. RAF had scarecrows placed around the airfields during Battle of Britain, Russians still have it in 21st century. One Croatian MiG-21 pilot told me that Croatian Airforce placed ultrasonic devices to scare birds away from the airbase, I suppose Americans are far advanced in this technique, but Russian AB have none of it, especially unprepared forward airstrips where Fulcrums operate.

 

Well, actually it does involve exactly the dual engagement capability. And accordingly Russian/Malaysian MiG-29S (9-13S) has it.

Yup, but the one featured in LO (bort 999) is MiG-29S based on 9-12 airframe with same avionics and warfare capability as 9-13S except slightly reduced fuel in dorsal tanks (cca 3170L in total). Export name given is MiG-29SD (because of 9-12 airframe) and 9-13 airframes upgraded do S standard and intended for export are called MiG-29SE.

 

Edit:

 

You wrote a lot since I last looked so if I said here something you guys already covered please 'scuse me. I have to babysit my cousin here :helpsmilie:so writing replies takes time.

[Pilotasso]

F-16 wont do high alpha manuevers beyond 32º. IF you do youll spin. Having said that it will do tight turns where other aircraft would pass beyond that mark. ;)

[4c Hajduk Veljko]

In any case, how about fixing the -huge- issues with F-15 functionality? ;)

This thread is about MiG-29. You could open a new one and talk about F-15.

[Vekkinho]

A pertinent question: Dual engagement at what range? Pitbull? Or full BVR with data link?

Depends on target size and distance from eachother.

 

If bandits are close it's not good, if they're spread it's not welcome too. Radar scans great amount of space and it takes time so it's at 32 km average when using onboard radar (Topaz) or full BVR thru datalink. ECM burnthru in dual engagement is possible at 11 km distance. Of course many weather and humidity factors affect those parameters.

 

But when they're guided via data link they turn active much later and bandits can break a lock and change location by going in the weeds. Once the missiles turn active they'll be too far.

 

And there's no difference in avionics and weapon systems between Russian S and Malaysian N except Malaysian has Imperial unit gauges and HUD and has a IFR possibility that can be retrofitted alternatively.

[Alfa]

Yup, but the one featured in LO (bort 999) is MiG-29S based on 9-12 airframe with same avionics and warfare capability as 9-13S except slightly reduced fuel in dorsal tanks (cca 3170L in total).

 

In Lock-on the "999" is just a skin Vekkinho :)

 

Export name given is MiG-29SD (because of 9-12 airframe) and 9-13 airframes upgraded do S standard and intended for export are called MiG-29SE.

 

Yes :)

 

And there's no difference in avionics and weapon systems between Russian S and Malaysian N except Malaysian has Imperial unit gauges...

 

Source? :)

 

- JJ.

[Alfa]

A pertinent question: Dual engagement at what range? Pitbull? Or full BVR with data link?

 

Good question.

 

The Malaysian MiG-29N should be capable of launching R-77s from a modified SNP mode and allow lock on a second target shortly after launch against the first one, but whether this requires autonomous operation of first launched missile or whether the system can support(datalink) both in-flight missiles simultaneously I don't know.....Olgerd? :) .

 

- JJ.

[Vekkinho]

In Lock-on the "999" is just a skin Vekkinho :)

 

Yes I know, I'm just saying that it's S variant based on 9-12 airframe IRL.

 

Source? :)

 

Modern Military Aircraft, ISBN 1-84509-014-4, Aerospace Publishing Ltd

and

entire "Состав комплекса вооружения истребителя МиГ-29".

 

Here's the scan of it's first page from 159 in total:

 

[Vekkinho]

Please do not ask me to present anything else on this subject, it is considered a military classified document in Croatia where I come from, live and work and I shouldn't publish it worldwide...but I hope this page I scanned does not reveal any intel.

 

Thanks.

[Shaman]

IBTL :pilotfly:

[Force_Feedback]

That page says very little, even nothing, just tells us how the weapon control system is called :P Nothing revealing at all, don't even sure why you post it, seems like the mig29a manual we all can dl freely on the web

[GGTharos]

Yep. If you have *classified* information, then you can't post it, we cannot be informed, and we won't know any better, and it won't be simulated.

 

That's too bad, but it is also something you can't complain about.

[hitman]

I hope to god you all realize I fly the MiG-29S almost exclusively...

[Force_Feedback]

And I really hope you believe me when I say that that page contains no more info than your average commercial. That info might fit a stat page in some popular fast paced arcade online shooter, not a flight manual, and it doesn't give any kind of useful info, except for how the weapon control system is called: RLK-29E (-E for export).

 

Having said that, I realise I've lost my miggie manual, need some links.

[tflash]

I hope to god you all realize I fly the MiG-29S almost exclusively...

 

 

Strange how everyone is excited about R-77 and dual engagement stuff etc. while to be honest, 99% of the times I *again* get shot online by a Mig-29S it is by an R-27ET missile. :D

 

Am I missing something here ;)

[hitman]

MiG-29 is one of the best planes to dogfight in...dont understand why ppl hate the mig...just cuz its got short legs and a small payload. Its downright lethal if you know your stuff.

[Force_Feedback]

Ahh, I remember giving online flying lessons for the Mig-29S, but that was like 3 years ago :/ and now I suck with the miggie, heh heh, aerobatics only for this guy.

[tflash]

MiG-29 is one of the best planes to dogfight in...dont understand why ppl hate the mig...just cuz its got short legs and a small payload. Its downright lethal if you know your stuff.

 

I agree with you: the Mig-29 is an awesome fighter, to my opinion also one of the most beautiful.

 

I think our opinion of the Mig-29A is not entirely honest. We keep comparing it with the updated F-16's and F-15's that defeated it on several but in fact limited occasions. But you can look at it from another point of view: when the Mig-29 was fielded, with HMS, R-60/R-73 and R-27T, the Belgian air force, e.g. flew F-16A lightweight interceptors with only 2 AIM-9N sidewinders (no, not the Lima indeed!) and NO ECM gear!

 

The germans flew the immortal F-4F with NO radar-guided missiles, only 4 sidewinders, for the most part of the eighties and till late in the nineties with outdated AIM-9J's. OK, they had at least ALQ-119.

 

The French flew Mirages (mostly F-1's) with obsolete missiles like R-550, and very dubious semi-active missiles.

 

OK, the F-16A was not a widow-maker in the same class as the Starfighter (who killed more Nato pilots than any enemy till today!) but the F-16's fell out of the sky at such a rate that a political scandal broke out in Belgium about this.

 

So, I really think the only problem of the Mig-29A is that we have put it in Lockon together with more evolved fighters.

[D-Scythe]

MiG-29 is one of the best planes to dogfight in...dont understand why ppl hate the mig...just cuz its got short legs and a small payload. Its downright lethal if you know your stuff.

 

That can be said for any fighter - they might suck in some ways, but if you can get the enemy to play you're game then you've won.

 

The trick to winning is finding a dumber pilot to fight against.

[GGTharos]

Not quite true. While the MiG-29A did enjoy significant BVR capability (because it HAD such capability) over some of these fighters, the radar was so poor that an aspect change could break lock. What difference (if any) this would have made is up for debate, of course.

I think the biggest difference there would be made by R-73 and HMS.

 

I agree with you: the Mig-29 is an awesome fighter, to my opinion also one of the most beautiful.

 

I think our opinion of the Mig-29A is not entirely honest. We keep comparing it with the updated F-16's and F-15's that defeated it on several but in fact limited occasions. But you can look at it from another point of view: when the Mig-29 was fielded, with HMS, R-60/R-73 and R-27T, the Belgian air force, e.g. flew F-16A lightweight interceptors with only 2 AIM-9N sidewinders (no, not the Lima indeed!) and NO ECM gear!

 

The germans flew the immortal F-4F with NO radar-guided missiles, only 4 sidewinders, for the most part of the eighties and till late in the nineties with outdated AIM-9J's. OK, they had at least ALQ-119.

 

The French flew Mirages (mostly F-1's) with obsolete missiles like R-550, and very dubious semi-active missiles.

 

OK, the F-16A was not a widow-maker in the same class as the Starfighter (who killed more Nato pilots than any enemy till today!) but the F-16's fell out of the sky at such a rate that a political scandal broke out in Belgium about this.

 

So, I really think the only problem of the Mig-29A is that we have put it in Lockon together with more evolved fighters.

[RvETito]

...and entire "Состав комплекса вооружения истребителя МиГ-29".

 

Here's the scan of it's first page from 159 in total:

 

 

What's so secret about it? It's in the net for 4-5 years. Besides, it concerns only the 9-12B export downgraded variant with R-27R1 and R-60MK.

[GGTharos]

If it is classified in his country then as far as -he- is concerned he can't talk/post about it.

 

Same thing here, if I knew the real AMRAAM's range, and had a public source, and confronted a USAF pilot with it he still could not comment.

[RvETito]

I'm not(and I can't) asking him to do anything he's not allowed to. My point is that he gave this scaned book to prove this:

 

And there's no difference in avionics and weapon systems between Russian S and Malaysian N except Malaysian has Imperial unit gauges...

 

This book doesn't say a word about either S or N variant, it's all about the downgraded 9-12B export version as I said. Besides, I really don't understand what's so secret or special about it. Every russian speaking(and not only) sim fan has it, along with Su-27SK flight manual.

[Guest IguanaKing]

I'm thinking GG meant that as a joke. The post in question sounds suspiciously like, "I could tell you, but then I'd have to kill you". Or another quote from the same movie "What I'm about to tell you is classified...it could end my career." :D

[RvETito]

What this book is really valuable for is that it explains the RL combat use of all A2A and A2G modes of the basic 29, along with RL HUD indication. I suppose it was the base used by ED in FC for the new more realistic A2A modes of the russian planes.

[Trident]

I'm all for implementing the R-77 dual-engagement capability in LOMAC. What's the point of having the MiG-29S and the R-77 in the sim if not?