MiG-29's BFM characteristics / doubts

[Yo-Yo]

There is not much to understand.

I'm not interested in the area above M0.4 and also the last sec before touchdown ground effect at an altitude of 0.5m no longer interests me. You know it very well. But let's not go back here to figure 8.9. or better to say, your "homemade" graphic interpretation of it again and again....

As I said, pure demagogy

The English forum members with aero-engineering background unfortunately do not read the russian threads.

I'm just waiting for yours

 

I think that in English part of the forum there are many matured and well educated people to see the difference between your statements that have no factual or engineering background and the scientific research work made with reliable CFD tool. You was not able to discuss any detail of this study, but you consider it "homemade".

It's not the best way to make your opinion more valuable.

[HDpilot]

I think that in English part of the forum there are many matured and well educated people to see the difference between your statements that have no factual or engineering background and the scientific research work made with reliable CFD tool. You was not able to discuss any detail of this study, but you consider it "homemade".

It's not the best way to make your opinion more valuable.

 

Can only repeat: Does your fm move the aircraft in real time trough a simulated air flow and pressure?

If not, so the ED´s "verification" by ED´s stab position is just a moving screen picture and boring for me. Stick inputs inertia of reaction and damping are my (not only my) issue.

In my opinion,

homemade

and very strange DCS and CFD OGE´s

 

What exactly are you going to "podkrutim"?

Nice sunday evening.

[Yo-Yo]

Can only repeat: Does your fm move the aircraft in real time trough a simulated air flow and pressure?

If not, so the ED´s "verification" by ED´s stab position is just a moving screen picture and boring for me. Stick inputs inertia of reaction and damping are my (not only my) issue.

In my opinion,

homemade

[ATTACH]246274[/ATTACH]

and very strange DCS and CFD OGE´s

[ATTACH]246275[/ATTACH]

 

What exactly are you going to "podkrutim"?

Nice sunday evening.

 

The choice of graphs just prove that you really do not understand the graphs you juggling here.

[HDpilot]

The choice of graphs just prove that you really do not understand the graphs you juggling here.

You'd like that, but it doesn't prove anything.

Following PA 8.4.3. and Fig. 8.8. + TP 1.2.5/6. you can nearly exclude a ground effect up to 280kmh. The DCS OGE still looks strange.

For me and other members, this is at best an illustration of the uselessness of the CFD experiment.

BUT: I don't care about the "angle" of the DCS "stabilizer". The reaction to the stick input is important in a video-game

What about "podkrutim"?

Edited September 1, 2020 by HDpilot

[Yo-Yo]

You'd like that, but it doesn't prove anything.

[ATTACH]246442[/ATTACH]

Following PA 8.4.3. and Fig. 8.8. + TP 1.2.5/6. you can nearly exclude a ground effect up to 280kmh. The DCS OGE still looks strange.

For me and other members, this is at best an illustration of the uselessness of the CFD experiment.

BUT: I don't care about the "angle" of the DCS "stabilizer". The reaction to the stick input is important in a video-game

What about "podkrutim"?

 

You can deny COVID or CFD... or consider the Earth flat. The stab angle is a function of the stick position, so it's the same.

 

Even if we подкрутим OGE nobody will notice it. Or with the next patch some people will notice it though we changed nothing. As usual.

[HDpilot]

You can deny COVID or CFD... or consider the Earth flat. The stab angle is a function of the stick position, so it's the same.

 

Even if we подкрутим OGE nobody will notice it. Or with the next patch some people will notice it though we changed nothing. As usual.

 

OK, if you swap your virtual stab for virtual basset hound ears, will the function stay the same?

Anyway, i dont care

I asked for https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4445677&postcount=4372

And muted looking forward to https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=4445731&postcount=4373

Would be great, if that happened someday

Maybe then you can also present an SME landing video with the correct and stable AoA. It would be worth.

Edited September 3, 2020 by HDpilot

[Top Jockey]

Hello again everyone.

My curisosity regarding MiG-29 vs other types in DACM continues, everyone feel free to share your opinion.

 

The current doubt is very simple, searching data from the web, I've been comparing the MiG-29A vs F-15C.

In the parameters below, the F-15C seems so be better than the MiG :

- T/W ratio

- wing loading

- CL max (lift coefficient)

 

In DCS I do find the Eagle to be pretty maneuverable, regarding nose pointing ability, turn rate, slow speed AoA controlability, etc... those aspects in which IRL the Fulcrum is known to excel.

So I would appreciate your opinion on, in real life which one of the two has the best:

- Sustained Turn Rate (maximum DPS)

- Instantaneous Turn Rate

- Smallest turn radius

- Corner speeds

 

Throughout the web, even keeping in mind the Fulcrum always got much more 'hype' than the Eagle regarding its pure dogfight abilities, some say the Eagle is capable of out-turning the Fulcrum, others say the contrary is true, so where do we stay ?

Thak you.

[AeriaGloria]

57 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

Hello again everyone.

My curisosity regarding MiG-29 vs other types in DACM continues, everyone feel free to share your opinion.

 

The current doubt is very simple, searching data from the web, I've been comparing the MiG-29A vs F-15C.

In the parameters below, the F-15C seems so be better than the MiG :

- T/W ratio

- wing loading

- CL max (lift coefficient)

 

In DCS I do find the Eagle to be pretty maneuverable, regarding nose pointing ability, turn rate, slow speed AoA controlability, etc... those aspects in which IRL the Fulcrum is known to excel.

So I would appreciate your opinion on, in real life which one of the two has the best:

- Sustained Turn Rate (maximum DPS)

- Instantaneous Turn Rate

- Smallest turn radius

- Corner speeds

 

Throughout the web, even keeping in mind the Fulcrum always got much more 'hype' than the Eagle regarding its pure dogfight abilities, some say the Eagle is capable of out-turning the Fulcrum, others say the contrary is true, so where do we stay ?

Thak you.

How did you come to the conclusion in DCS that Eagle has better T:W, turn rate/radius, and CL? 

[Top Jockey]

1 minute ago, AeriaGloria said:

How did you come to the conclusion in DCS that Eagle has better T:W, turn rate/radius, and CL? 

 

Hello,

No that is real world data (might not be 100 % correct values), not DCS.

Well, I merelly used empty weights, wing area from Wikipedia and the such.

 

I know it isn't the most correct, but i calculated T / W and wing loadings with empty weights, just to have a very basic rough ideia, comparing wise.

CL is what I managed to find in several sites (when available).

 

Turn rates, turn radius, corner speed is what I'm asking ...

 

[AeriaGloria]

2 minutes ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Hello,

No that is real world data (might not be 100 % correct values), not DCS.

Well, I merelly used empty weights, wing area from Wikipedia and the such.

 

I know it isn't the most correct, but i calculated T / W and wing loadings with empty weights, just to have a very basic rough ideia, comparing wise.

CL is what I managed to find in several sites (when available).

 

Turn rates, turn radius, corner speed is what I'm asking ...

 

This is probably still up to date for 4th except for Mirage. It’s some old data but should be helpful. Tacview is very good for analyzing turn rate and radius. https://dcs.silver.ru/74,9,turnrate

[Ironhand]

On 4/8/2023 at 10:34 AM, Top Jockey said:

So I would appreciate your opinion on, in real life which one of the two has the best:

- Sustained Turn Rate (maximum DPS)

- Instantaneous Turn Rate

- Smallest turn radius

- Corner speeds

Someone should be along shortly to inform you that the aircraft with the better pilot will outperform the other.

Until then, however, none of this is a matter of opinion. I'm not where i can refer to them but there are energy/maneuvering charts out there for both. Starting from a neutral position, if both aircraft are piloted to maximum performance and advantage, the one with the better sustained turn rate will "win" a nose-to-tail (two-circle) fight. The one with the better turn radius will "win" a nose-to-nose (one-circle fight).

Edited April 9, 2023 by Ironhand

[Top Jockey]

3 hours ago, Ironhand said:

Someone should be along shortly to inform you that the aircraft with the better pilot will outperform the other.

Until then, however, none of this is a matter of opinion. I'm not where i can refer to them but there are energy/maneuvering charts out there for both. Starting from a neutral position, if both aircraft are piloted to maximum performance and advantage, the one with the better sustained turn rate will "win" a nose-to-tail (two-circle) fight. The one with the better turn radius will "win" a nose-to-nose (one-circle fight).

 

 

Thank you, Ironhand.

Yep that in bold seems to be automatic around here ! 

The matter is, like on previous times (in this same thread also) I've asked people's own point of view on the matter (opinion), regarding a pure machine vs machine capabilities comparison (on jet fighters).

I guess it's a side effect DCS World has on jet fighter enthusiast like me - it puts us curious about which characteristics one jet can be superior to other.

 

Hence, seeing how well the F-15C performs in DCS, one gets curious to know a little bit more detail, on how it would do against the MiG-29A in real life, regarding turn rates and the such.

 

Also, parameters like wing area and wing loading for several jets are easy to find, although others like "overall lift area" not so much.

Edited April 9, 2023 by Top Jockey

[okopanja]

4 hours ago, Ironhand said:

Someone should be along shortly to inform you that the aircraft with the better pilot will outperform the other.

In DCS, player pulls stick to the break point, put simply: all of them are aces.

[captain_dalan]

On 4/8/2023 at 5:40 PM, Top Jockey said:

 

Hello,

No that is real world data (might not be 100 % correct values), not DCS.

Well, I merelly used empty weights, wing area from Wikipedia and the such.

 

I know it isn't the most correct, but i calculated T / W and wing loadings with empty weights, just to have a very basic rough ideia, comparing wise.

CL is what I managed to find in several sites (when available).

 

Turn rates, turn radius, corner speed is what I'm asking ...

 

Those are not very good metrics for assessing aircraft performance. For starters, aside from few YouTubers, very few people fly with their fuel flow set to off. So any comparison should start with start and end fuel points in mind, and that will be mission related. Even BFM/ACM training sorties have bingo and joker states in mind. And then there is wing loading which can be very deceptive in its own right as:

1. it almost never includes the total lifting surface available to a plane.
2. the entirety of the lifting surface isn't always available across all possible angle of attack values and these depend greatly on parts of the envelope explored during a fight.
3. it NEVER includes aerodynamic properties of the airfoil, which is to be honest IMO its greatest flaw.

Look no further then planes with "tiny" wings and "heavy" wing loading (comparatively) that seem to turn quite well in their own right, both in rate and in radius. 

Thrust to weight..... again, way too simplistic, and with static thrust values (that are usually what engine specifications quote) are usually completely useless. Say, a plane has TWR of 0.7/1 with two engines, each of which has individual TWR of 8/1. Are the engines themselves more maneuverable then the plane they are attached to? Is a 2x4 with a rocket duct-taped to it the best BFM machine in the world? 

Edited April 15, 2023 by captain_dalan

[Top Jockey]

On 4/11/2023 at 12:33 AM, captain_dalan said:

Those are not very good metrics for assessing aircraft performance. For starters, aside from few YouTubers, very few people fly with their fuel flow set to off. So any comparison should start with start and end fuel points in mind, and that will be mission related. Even BFM/ACM training sorties have bingo and joker states in mind. And then there is wing loading which can be very deceptive in its own right as:

1. it almost never includes the total lifting surface available to a plane.
2. the entirety of the lifting surface isn't always available across all possible angle of attack values and these depend greatly on parts of the envelope explored during a fight.
3. it NEVER includes aerodynamic properties of the airfoil, which is to be honest IMO its greatest flaw.

Look no further then planes with "tiny" wings and "heavy" wing loading (comparatively) that seem to turn quite well in their own right, both in rate and in radius. 

Thrust to weight..... again, way too simplistic, and with static thrust values (that are usually what engine specifications quote) are usually completely useless. Say, a plane has TWR of 0.7/1 with two engines, each of which has individual TWR of 8/1. Are the engines themselves more maneuverable then the plane they are attached to? Is a 2x4 with a rocket duct-taped to it the best BFM machine in the world? 

 

 

Hello @captain_dalan, thank you for your time.

Yeah, I know this is not exactly a 'scientific' way of measuring performances, but these a basic and more easily understandable parameteres.

(And I know there are several others, like for instance one you've mentioned in the past: Lift / Drag ratio, etc...)

 

But not being me an expert, I've chosen to keep things more basic and easy to understand.

So I guess what I'm trying to ask is:

- given the known "numbers" regarding the parameters ( T/W, CL Max, Wing Loading, and others of due importance ), can the F-15C airframe be that good (or even better) than the MiG-29A, regarding turning / maneuver capabilities ?

[Ironhand]

5 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

…can the F-15C airframe be that good (or even better) than the MiG-29A, regarding turning / maneuver capabilities ?

That would depend on which turning/maneuver capabilities you’re referring to, wouldn’t it? For instance, the F-15 has a slightly tighter turning radius and higher AoA (nose pointing) capability. The MiG-29 has a slightly higher sustained turn rate. So if both aircraft are flown to max capability, F-15 should outperform the MiG-29 in a one circle fight. OTOH, the MiG-29 should outperform the F-15 in a two circle fight.

[AeriaGloria]

6 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Hello @captain_dalan, thank you for your time.

Yeah, I know this is not exactly a 'scientific' way of measuring performances, but these a basic and more easily understandable parameteres.

(And I know there are several others, like for instance one you've mentioned in the past: Lift / Drag ratio, etc...)

 

But not being me an expert, I've chosen to keep things more basic and easy to understand.

So I guess what I'm trying to ask is:

- given the known "numbers" regarding the parameters ( T/W, CL Max, Wing Loading, and others of due importance ), can the F-15C airframe be that good (or even better) than the MiG-29A, regarding turning / maneuver capabilities ?

If all you want is energy maneuverability comparison, here you go https://dcs.silver.ru/74,9,turnrate

and another In a PDF that covers more planes I can DM you 

[captain_dalan]

10 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Hello @captain_dalan, thank you for your time.

Yeah, I know this is not exactly a 'scientific' way of measuring performances, but these a basic and more easily understandable parameteres.

(And I know there are several others, like for instance one you've mentioned in the past: Lift / Drag ratio, etc...)

 

But not being me an expert, I've chosen to keep things more basic and easy to understand.

So I guess what I'm trying to ask is:

- given the known "numbers" regarding the parameters ( T/W, CL Max, Wing Loading, and others of due importance ), can the F-15C airframe be that good (or even better) than the MiG-29A, regarding turning / maneuver capabilities ?

Inside those parameters there isn't a valid way to confirm or deny your statement. If you chose to hold one or the other as true, that will entirely up to you. But i for one, would never take that statement as anything other then contrived. I can always fudge some numbers to reach a conclusion that would suit my argument. Especially with vague metrics that hold little actual value. There's a reason people use Ps diagrams. 

[59th_Buncsi]

11 hours ago, Ironhand said:

That would depend on which turning/maneuver capabilities you’re referring to, wouldn’t it? For instance, the F-15 has a slightly tighter turning radius and higher AoA (nose pointing) capability. The MiG-29 has a slightly higher sustained turn rate. So if both aircraft are flown to max capability, F-15 should outperform the MiG-29 in a one circle fight. OTOH, the MiG-29 should outperform the F-15 in a two circle fight.

Probably the easiest way is to look at the charts.
https://dcs.silver.ru/Diagram/Mig29_2
https://dcs.silver.ru/Diagram/F15c

[Top Jockey]

20 hours ago, Ironhand said:

That would depend on which turning/maneuver capabilities you’re referring to, wouldn’t it? For instance, the F-15 has a slightly tighter turning radius and higher AoA (nose pointing) capability. The MiG-29 has a slightly higher sustained turn rate. So if both aircraft are flown to max capability, F-15 should outperform the MiG-29 in a one circle fight. OTOH, the MiG-29 should outperform the F-15 in a two circle fight.

 

Thank you @Ironhand.

You nailed it - absolutely 100 % the kind of details I was trying to know !

[Top Jockey]

19 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

If all you want is energy maneuverability comparison, here you go https://dcs.silver.ru/74,9,turnrate

and another In a PDF that covers more planes I can DM you 

 

Thank you @AeriaGloria.

Sure I've seen the comparison tables site - quite interesting.

You can send the PDF if it isn't much botter to you - thank you!

[Top Jockey]

16 hours ago, captain_dalan said:

Inside those parameters there isn't a valid way to confirm or deny your statement. If you chose to hold one or the other as true, that will entirely up to you. But i for one, would never take that statement as anything other then contrived. I can always fudge some numbers to reach a conclusion that would suit my argument. Especially with vague metrics that hold little actual value. There's a reason people use Ps diagrams. 

 

@captain_dalan, I understand you.

So, looking at the diagrams 59th_Buncsi posted :

- for instance at sea level, the MiG-29A can achieve 9 Gs at a lower speed than the F-15C ;

- respectively 460 kts for the MiG, versus 500 kts (Mach 0.75) for the Eagle.

 

So having in mind that in the metrics / parameters / etc. I mention before the Eagle seems to have better numbers, my doubt (curiosity) is :

What kind of parameters are responsible for that kind of differences ( higher speed for the same G and like Ironhand mentioned - lower sustained turn rate on the Eagle ) - airframe design ?

Edited April 20, 2023 by Top Jockey

[Pavlin_33]

1 hour ago, Top Jockey said:

What kind of parameters are responsible for that kind of differences ( higher speed for the same G and like Ironhand mentioned - lower sustained turn rate on the Eagle ) - airframe design ?

 

For the corner speed the limiting factor is maximum attainable angle-of-attack. For the max sustained turn rate it's the max. available thrust.

[Top Jockey]

On 4/20/2023 at 9:20 AM, 59th_Buncsi said:

Probably the easiest way is to look at the charts.
https://dcs.silver.ru/Diagram/Mig29_2
https://dcs.silver.ru/Diagram/F15c

 

Thank you @59th_Buncsi - very helpful !

 

15 hours ago, Pavlin_33 said:

For the corner speed the limiting factor is maximum attainable angle-of-attack. For the max sustained turn rate it's the max. available thrust.

Thank you @Pavlin_33.

For max. sustained turn rate, I thougth that parameteres like CL max and Wing Loading also played a role... but I'm still learning.

Edited April 21, 2023 by Top Jockey

[AeriaGloria]

7 hours ago, Top Jockey said:

 

Thank you @59th_Buncsi - very helpful !

 

Thank you @Pavlin_33.

For max. sustained turn rate, I thougth that parameteres like CL max and Wing Loading also played a role... but I'm still learning.

 

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1QKrcvIW949R5Iuz6qEcn1nZDneARkHUe/view?usp=drivesdk

 

Here is PDF with EM charts made only using DCS data. It’s very well written, explained, and the diagrams are both complex and very easy to read. Nothing can beat the I-16 when it comes to turn radius of 200m

Edited April 21, 2023 by AeriaGloria