DCS: MiG-29A Fulcrum

[zerO_crash]

8 minutes ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Looks like the navigational mode. There's no indexes, no target selections, and that circle looks like the waypoint symbol. Not sure what the lower information is outside of the distance and heading readouts.

It's definitely a 29G of the Luftwaffe.

For comparison, here are some 9.12s and their own HUD symbology:

Note the same circle? Waypoint.

I was actually about to suggest that the "Q" is just an O with some detritus or a cloud in the way. And then, one more google search phrase change up and BAM!:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/when-u-s-navy-fighters-dogfighted-with-the-mig-29-fulcrum-remembering-exercise-agile-archer-2002/
 

Sure enough, German MiG-29s over Key West in 2002. KNQX.

 

Yeah, that last digit seems deformed, but if you look closely, it's because of the F-18's vertical stabilator posing as a different background than the sky. The time readout is in the following format - "0-00" where the first digit is in hours, and the last two digits in minutes.

[MiG21bisFishbedL]

33 minutes ago, okopanja said:

This Yugoslav is Mig-29, photograph taken probably during 90s.

 

Thanks for the ID. I suspected that was the coloration on the tail.

[pepin1234]

1 hour ago, MiG21bisFishbedL said:

Looks like the navigational mode. There's no indexes, no target selections, and that circle looks like the waypoint symbol. Not sure what the lower information is outside of the distance and heading readouts.

It's definitely a 29G of the Luftwaffe.

For comparison, here are some 9.12s and their own HUD symbology:

Note the same circle? Waypoint.

I was actually about to suggest that the "Q" is just an O with some detritus or a cloud in the way. And then, one more google search phrase change up and BAM!:

https://theaviationgeekclub.com/when-u-s-navy-fighters-dogfighted-with-the-mig-29-fulcrum-remembering-exercise-agile-archer-2002/
 

Sure enough, German MiG-29s over Key West in 2002. KNQX.

You right. Make sense as a Navigation mode. Another one here low res in metric

Edited February 5 by pepin1234

[PLAAF]

Hi guys, just one quick question. Does anyone know what this is?
null

[some1]

Manual target wingspan setting, used when you don't have radar lock.

[PLAAF]

33 minutes ago, some1 said:

Manual target wingspan setting, used when you don't have radar lock.

Thanks. So it is an axis, right? Or is it a 3 position rotator?

[some1]

An axis I think.

[Ironhand]

3 position rotator: Small-Medium-Large

EDIT: Used to set the target base size when using the cannon in “predicted target” mode but it’s also used with A2A missiles. Just don’t remember why for the latter, at the moment. It may have to do with the proximity fuse.

Edited February 9 by Ironhand

[some1]

16 minutes ago, Ironhand said:

3 position rotator: Small-Medium-Large

The manual says "a potentiometer with 3 markers" which suggests an axis.

 

[Ironhand]

15 minutes ago, some1 said:

The manual says "a potentiometer with 3 markers" which suggests an axis.

 

In that case, I would be wrong. I was basing my comment on the Su-27 manual which made it sound like a 3-position switch.

EDIT: Though I do wonder why you would need a “Medium” position marker, if there weren’t discrete stops. All you’d need is small/large.

Edited February 9 by Ironhand

[Dragon1-1]

It may be that it combines gunsight wingspan setting and target size setting for missiles. Gunsight is an axis, setting it to the middle position sets the target size to medium.

[AeriaGloria]

11 hours ago, PLAAF said:

Hi guys, just one quick question. Does anyone know what this is?
null

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

[PLAAF]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

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

So is it an axis? Or is it a 3-position rotator switch?

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, PLAAF said:

So is it an axis? Or is it a 3-position rotator switch?

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

[WildBillKelsoe]

thats how I like them young dumb and Ful of crum

 

[ESA_maligno]

En 7/1/2024 a las 3:07, EagleEye.DCS dijo:

thanks for your info. We looking forward further info

What variant of the 9.12? According to the Soviet Union's projects, versions prior to 9.13 could carry underwing tanks and R77 missiles. In fact, FC's MiG29A is an intermediate phase between the latest 9.12 (S version in the West) and the improved 9.12 (an A+ version that would be said today).

 

If it is the first version (9.12) we will lose the underwing tank capacity nor will we be able to operate the E version of the R27...

Edited February 28 by ESA_maligno

[okopanja]

4 minutes ago, ESA_maligno said:

What variant of the 9.12? According to the Soviet Union's projects, versions prior to 9.13 could carry underwing tanks and R77 missiles. In fact, FC's MiG29A is an intermediate phase between the latest 9.12 (S version in the West) and the improved 9.12 (an A+ version that would be said today).

 

If it is the first version (9.12) we will lose the underwing tank capacity nor will we be able to operate the E version of the R27...

 

Hi there, 9.12 originally did not have a radar capable of guiding R-77.

The 9.12 could obtain such capability if the the computer Ts-100 is replaced by combination of Ts-101/Ts-102, which significantly enhanced the capabilities of the radar and FCS:

• radar could not be saturated with ECM as before
• support was added for:
  • R-77 (required installing additional R-77 installation in radar as well)
  • KAB-500
• ability to detect slow flying helicopters was added

This information is based on the interview of the Mig-29 pilot Mirčeta Jokanović. In the interview he explains that around 1996 they were offered the upgrade/remont for the 29s that could be largely conducted on premise (except for the gun modification which required structural changes). The upgrade was offered at $100.000 per piece, but despite the Airforce requesting this, someone on political side decided this was not needed. Result was seen in 1999 when 2 pilots died why fighting in jets where rarely both Radar and SPO-15 operated and off course without missiles with active seeker.

 

 

[Tarres]

@okopanja, is this upgrade the 9.12S? Created as an upgrade of the 9.12 along the lines of the 9.13S?

[okopanja]

15 minutes ago, Tarres said:

@okopanja, is this upgrade the 9.12S? Created as an upgrade of the 9.12 along the lines of the 9.13S?

It would correspond to the S, but S in DCS does not have Kab-500, however, this was in 1996, some 28 years ago!

Lots of time has passed since, end even then the "teens" approx from 2006-2008, are 10-12 years newer.

I personally think we will not receive the upgraded 9.12 in DCS, but rather original cold war variant with know limitations. In future this may open the possibility to introduce a bit modernized variant of 9-12 with a certain degree of multi-role capability.

 

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

6 minutes ago, okopanja said:

I personally think we will not receive the upgraded 9.12 in DCS

The first post in this very thread clearly states we'll be getting an '80s era MiG-29...

[okopanja]

40 minutes ago, Raven (Elysian Angel) said:

The first post in this very thread clearly states we'll be getting an '80s era MiG-29...

No worries I am in this thread from the start.

No need to worry about R-77, yet...

[Silver_Dragon]

9 minutes ago, okopanja said:

No worries I am in this thread from the start.

No need to worry about R-77, yet...

Chizh has answerd on the russian forum about the Mig-29A, "a aircraft based on east country aircraft, without nuclear weapons". I think that can be a Mig-29A "export" version.

[okopanja]

4 minutes ago, Silver_Dragon said:

Chizh has answerd on the russian forum about the Mig-29A, "a aircraft based on east country aircraft, without nuclear weapons". I think that can be a Mig-29A "export" version.

I am not doubting Chizh, just for the sake of facts I clarified that more capable 9-12A/B was possible as of 1996 at least. Ts101/Ts102 production started in 1991 which roughly checks out with the appearance of R-77. This off-course would be subject to certain well known restrictions.

For now appearance of 80s Mig-29 FF is what we are all eagerly looking forward to.

[ESA_maligno]

What is surprising is that in 2024 there is still no public documentation to simulate a MiG29S, SM or SMT but there is to simulate an EFA or an F15E. That speaks a lot about how information sources are managed.

[Pavlin_33]

On 2/5/2024 at 8:47 PM, pepin1234 said:

You right. Make sense as a Navigation mode. Another one here low res in metric

 

Is this the HUD contrast how the RL pilots see it? If yes, then our DCS one is way too pale.

Edited February 28 by Pavlin_33