MiG-29A FF: capabilities and how will it fit into the (meta)game?

[Silver_Dragon]

7 minutes ago, pepin1234 said:

I don’t expect that. Mig-29S is a standard variant for Ukraine Air Force. If MiG-29A have been planed from public manuals. Mig-29S is possible as well. What mean public for ED? Someone shared the technical manual on the internet. 
 

Mig-29S and Mig-25 have been in NATO allies, some of them ex Soviets republics. Somewhere should be enough documentation for them.

I think those kinds of comments don't help at all. ED has obtained the necessary information to build a Mig-29A full fidelity module, by legal channels, without ending up in jail or an FSB inspection. Here we talk about realities, not dreams and coming now to complain because ED gives us an A vs an S, makes no sense. And no, "Country A has it" doesn't work if the rights owners put a cross on you.

[BIGNEWY]

Folks we will share more details when we are ready but as mentioned it will only be the MiG-29A 

thanks

[okopanja]

2 hours ago, DisplayName said:

What are you on about? make sense. Why would you put an EWR on top of the fuselage? who is getting shot from orbit, and how would you display that on an archaic 2D display; and what does that have to do with my question about the HDD. . . 

Dude I can confirm to you that HDD and HUD show exactly the same picture, based on the Yugoslav manual. The reason for HDD was to ensure readability when the sun rays are too intense for HUD to be readable, and no this is not a waste.

This display likely is the same one as in Su-27SK. Likely reason: component reuse and cost saving. Unlike more capable Su-27, Mig-29 was from the very first version developed to be guided by GCI for a limited amount of time, which meant it did not need more comprehensive SA, but rather help from GCI officer who had access on information about targets from multiple sensor sources.

For this reason even in the earliest version, both automatic guidance (through Lazur) and verbal communication were provided.

We do know that experience will be different than current FC3 Mig-29A, despite perhaps keeping similar flight model. The pilot will have to learn way more, and will have a higher work load. In some cases this will lead to better capabilities and in some to worse.

At minimum:

- Navigation system will be updated (I hope that ED integrates the ability to update it from ground at least)

- EOS will be somewhat weaker

- Helmet will be reworked, and finally will give you additional visual and audio information presently not available with our "green" circle.

- RWR will have some advantages/disadvantages, compared to the current SPO-15LM

- DL will have to be an integral part of the module. Just for the hint: it will also indicate redirection to alternative target, something we do not have at the moment which makes it very difficult to use AWACS calls under conditions of multiple maneuvering targets.

Last but not least: even if you disagree with someone on a subject, please keep the communication civil and constructive. Next time people will be more forgiving in cases where you are proved wrong and forthcoming to help you in areas where you may not be so strong.

 

[Northstar98]

21 minutes ago, BIGNEWY said:

Folks we will share more details when we are ready but as mentioned it will only be the MiG-29A 

thanks

Does this mean 9-12, 9-12A or 9-12B?

[pepin1234]

Coming from ED I have doubts about the R-27ER implementation.

[BIGNEWY]

13 minutes ago, Northstar98 said:

Does this mean 9-12, 9-12A or 9-12B?

We will confirm in a future newsletter 

[ustio]

1 hour ago, pepin1234 said:

I don’t expect that. Mig-29S is a standard variant for Ukraine Air Force. If MiG-29A have been planed from public manuals. Mig-29S is possible as well. What mean public for ED? Someone shared the technical manual on the internet. 
 

 

If im not mistaken, Mig-29S is 9.13S which only a handfull were made. Ukraine use standard 9.13. There isn't a lot of difference between 9.12 and 9.13.

 

larger fuel tank on the spine, ECM, and more A/G weapon. Technically if the FC3 Mig-29S FM is correct and just use standard DCS ECM they could do it.

Edited January 10 by ustio

[Viper33]

On 1/8/2024 at 11:54 AM, Tarres said:

Only one thing about CrazyGman said,  in order to use the R-77, R27T and 27RE and RT we need the 9.13S (around 20 delivered to the VVS).

9.13 was the one with the Gardenya ECM, more fuel in the spin, ability to carry underwing fuel tanks (retrofitted to 9.12 so maybe we can have it) and weapons payload increased to 4000kg (tandem FAB-500 in inner and medium pylons)

9.12 can use ER/ET.

[pepin1234]

5 hours ago, okopanja said:

BTW: the manuals for all versions of Mig-25 have been "published" recently. The only operational Mig-25s were 3 airframes of Algerian Air Force, and I think they were supposed to stop flying by the end of 2022 or 2023.

I will say Mig-25 was a very impressive fighter iconic of Cold War. ED can make export variants, as well late variants as the ex Soviets republics now NATO kept some of them, based them and they have retired pilots. Of course, for ED priority is western modules first. 

Edited January 10 by pepin1234

[WinterH]

9 hours ago, DisplayName said:

I'm playing around with the FC3 MiG29 and the Su27/J11 in order to determine if I would end up liking the FF MiG29A. . . Comparing the two FC3 jets, the MiG29A sucks. Could I please get some assistance and recommendations for using the MiG29A in a way that it doesn't suck compared to the Flanker.

I'm not a MiG-29 expert by any stretch, so take what I say with a pinch of salt, but as far as I know:

MiG has pretty insane acceleration and climb performance, as well as a pretty great turn rate at medium speeds, and pretty good control authority also around those speeds. In my experience though, if you get slow vs a Hornet for example, it won't go well for you. I think the speed sweet spot is around 650-750ish km/h, people who know better can give you more precise numbers. It's control authority can be too good for its own good though, without a FBW to limit what you do with it, it is easy to bleed off speed in it, so takes a really steady hand to control it. While being super slow isn't ideal for Flanker either, it remains somewhat controllable in that state too, but MiG's controls feel like the plane gets encased in rock at those speeds :P. However, unload and those afterburners can get back that speed surprisingly quick.

It isn't an easy plane to do well in, which is part of the charm for many of us. It can be very fast and maneuverable, but only when controlled carefully. Flanker is the somewhat better of two overall in my opinion, but MiG is the one we can get in full fidelity for the foreseeable future.

The great initial maneuverability, and the helmet sight together with R-73 makes it still very dangerous up close, especially for aircraft that doesn't have such high off boresight capability.

[JetFighterGirl]

5 hours ago, DisplayName said:

Yes, apparently. I can also read. I said it was wasted potential (which it is), not that is was incorrect.

 

The purpose of the question was to try and get some additional information from anyone who has read a real MiG29 flight manual; other than the Luftwaffenmaterialkommando GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 (which I have, although it doesn't specifically answer the question, it just tells you the purpose of the HDD unit). Because that manual in no way, shape, or form states it as a HUD repeater

 

It makes sense that HDD and HUD show the same information when you consider how it was developed. 
MiG-29 SEI-31 Fighter Unified Display System (SEI-31-01) is designed to display sighting, flight and navigation information on the ILS-31 windshield display and the IPV direct vision television display.
The SEI includes: Windshield indicator (ILS-31), direct vision indicator (IPV), digital computer (DVM), character generator (CG), power supplies (BPN), interfacing and switching (BSK), digital processing (BCO). The digital computer and the blocks listed after it are located in the technical compartment of the aircraft.

It was then further developed for the Sukhoi to improve on the information presented but not retrofitted into Fulcrum A.

[FlankerKiller]

12 hours ago, Wizard_03 said:

i don't expect it too perform any better then it already does on the servers. But its a heck of a little airplane in the right hands.

That’s the odd thing about this module. It’s kinda already out in an alpha state. We can already play with it and get used to it.

it’s certainly a pilots aircraft. It isn’t fly by wire, and will bite you in a hurry. I think the Tomcat crowd will love it. After full fidelity I just can’t do the FC3 jets anymore. Having my second favorite jet from LOMAC in full fidelity is going to be sweet. 

[HWasp]

15 hours ago, DisplayName said:

I'm playing around with the FC3 MiG29 and the Su27/J11 in order to determine if I would end up liking the FF MiG29A. . . Comparing the two FC3 jets, the MiG29A sucks. Could I please get some assistance and recommendations for using the MiG29A in a way that it doesn't suck compared to the Flanker.

 

NOTE: Modern jets I do fly on the Growling Sidewinder server, because it appears that it is the only option (give me recommendations for servers?). I have found that the MiG29A bleeds off energy extremely fast in a similar turn and intensity compared to the Flanker; where I found that the MiG29 got so slow it felt like it was hardly moving (~500kph compared to the Flanker which is a very similar turn/intensity did not drop below ~900kph). The situational awareness is nill by (except for the RWR which I do like).

 

Questions: Considering that the MiG29 has a HUD and the other screen which appears to be a HUD repeater, is it possible on the real MiG29A (FF MiG29A) to have say the HUD set to a form of weapon employment mode (lets say BVR) while having the HUD repeater TV set to a Nav menu? Or, are there any MiG29As that have had a datalink installed that could be used within the ED MiG29A?

 

I want to like the MiG29, but, I just can't in comparison to the Flanker. So please educate me on how to use it, and I'll continue to try and practice with the FC3 MiG29A. I do tend to use the Flanker at low altitude, very fast, and only using the RADAR for IFF before firing an IR guided missile.

 

GS is not the right place to start flying the MiG-29.

Try BlueFlag '80 (the 1980s server version) or Tempest's server, there you can fight on more equal terms. (1980s weapon restrictions, no amraams flying around)

The MiG-29's advantage over the Su-27 is it's superior kinematics, great acceleration and climb rate. You can pick your fights and get away from very hairy situations (if you have the fuel  ) and you can give your R-27s a large boost in effective range with your speed.

Flying low, trying to ambush people is a valid tactic on GS, with everyone else having amraams, but in the 1980s setting against Sparrows it's a completely different game. There, being high and fast is usually the winner tactic, and the MiG-29 is very very good at that.

[NineLine]

Just a reminder, quoting, clipping or sharing any parts, text or anything from any manual that you cannot verify is legally shareable and can't include that link showing it's shareable is a 1.16 rule infraction. We do not want to hand these out but will have to if ignored. Thanks. 

[Gierasimov]

17 hours ago, DisplayName said:

Questions: Considering that the MiG29 has a HUD and the other screen which appears to be a HUD repeater, is it possible on the real MiG29A (FF MiG29A) to have say the HUD set to a form of weapon employment mode (lets say BVR) while having the HUD repeater TV set to a Nav menu? Or, are there any MiG29As that have had a datalink installed that could be used within the ED MiG29A?

 

HDD repeats what's shown in HUD depending on its mode. Both displays are part of the same system as @JetFighterGirl nicely summarizes above.

Data link that you are looking for is the E502-20 “Biryuza”, short radio bursts that are sending commands to the aircraft updating it's target location which is displayed on the HUD and repeated on HDD.

There is a bit of confusion at the moment if DCS: Fulcrum-A will feature E502-20 “Biryuza”, we need to wait for the reveal and features roadmap. 

Edited January 10 by Gierasimov

[Harlikwin]

On 1/9/2024 at 4:50 PM, twistking said:

I already said, i find Fulcrum HARM intriguing, no need to sell it to me further.

Joke aside, i think flawed, limited systems make for good DCS gameplay and immersion. When going up against SAMs in your Viper with HARMs, HTS and a capable human wingman, you are constantly reminded that DCS AI is rather dumb and that your mission lacks the operational complexity in which modern SEAD would even make sense.
Fulcrum HARM DEAD against all odds seems more interesting imho.

Lol, you can "simulate it" right now. Hop into fulcrum fly to waypoint make pew noises, or hose off an R27 into nowhere and RTB. Successful mission. 

 

Edited January 13 by Harlikwin

[okopanja]

1 hour ago, Gierasimov said:

There is a bit of confusion at the moment if DCS: Fulcrum-A will feature E502-20 “Biryuza”, we need to wait for the reveal and features roadmap. 

Well even export version of 9.12 had it, so I would pretty much consider it incomplete without it.

Edited January 10 by okopanja

[Harlikwin]

18 hours ago, DisplayName said:

I'm playing around with the FC3 MiG29 and the Su27/J11 in order to determine if I would end up liking the FF MiG29A. . . Comparing the two FC3 jets, the MiG29A sucks. Could I please get some assistance and recommendations for using the MiG29A in a way that it doesn't suck compared to the Flanker.

 

NOTE: Modern jets I do fly on the Growling Sidewinder server, because it appears that it is the only option (give me recommendations for servers?). I have found that the MiG29A bleeds off energy extremely fast in a similar turn and intensity compared to the Flanker; where I found that the MiG29 got so slow it felt like it was hardly moving (~500kph compared to the Flanker which is a very similar turn/intensity did not drop below ~900kph). The situational awareness is nill by (except for the RWR which I do like).

 

Questions: Considering that the MiG29 has a HUD and the other screen which appears to be a HUD repeater, is it possible on the real MiG29A (FF MiG29A) to have say the HUD set to a form of weapon employment mode (lets say BVR) while having the HUD repeater TV set to a Nav menu? Or, are there any MiG29As that have had a datalink installed that could be used within the ED MiG29A?

 

I want to like the MiG29, but, I just can't in comparison to the Flanker. So please educate me on how to use it, and I'll continue to try and practice with the FC3 MiG29A. I do tend to use the Flanker at low altitude, very fast, and only using the RADAR for IFF before firing an IR guided missile.

I mean the 29 is "inferior" to the flanker when it comes to things like sensors, but well the FC3 sensors work well enough, and hopefully if ED does a good job with the radar/EOS then they will be realistically worse than the FC3 versions. But still decent enough for what needs to be done. You basically just need to practice using the radar to quickly easily find targets. The EO system at least beyond BFM should be trash so I wouldn't spend much time there, though who knows how it will be modeled by ED. 

Where it shines compared to the FC3 flanker (and I'll leave the discussion of how "good" the FC3 FM is to another thread) is that the 29 is vastly more nimble compared to the flanker accelerates better and IIRC rates better. I far prefer the 29 over the flanker in DCS for these reasons.

The other pro-tip is that don't ever fly the 29 in burner except air combat, you will instantly be out of gas. In fact outside of climbing keep the throttle at 80-90%. You have magic range gauge and you can see how drastically your throttle setting impacts the range. At higher alt (Where you should be anyway) you can fly across all the maps in the 29 if you aren't being dumb.  And your cruise speed will be nearly the same at 80% or 100% throttle. 

Also don't overspeed the 29 or you wont be able to turn.

Also don't fly it on GS, tempests or BF80's are the better servers for it. Or Enigmas if you want to seal club gen2/3 jets with it.

Also the 9.12 should have DL, though not what you are used to in the FC3 flanker. 

Edited January 10 by Harlikwin

[FlankerKiller]

18 hours ago, DisplayName said:

 

I'm playing around with the FC3 MiG29 and the Su27/J11 in order to determine if I would end up liking the FF MiG29A. . . Comparing the two FC3 jets, the MiG29A sucks. Could I please get some assistance and recommendations for using the MiG29A in a way that it doesn't suck compared to the Flanker.

 

Try getting good? Sorry I had to. BVR it will suck compared to the AMRAAM slinging crowd. It isn’t FWB, and if you’re not used to that then that could be biting you too. In a dogfight it should be a match for anything, and an overmatch for most things. But you have to manage the energy. I’m not sure of every tactic, but there should be a fight you can fight and win against any other jet once merged. 

[FlankerKiller]

I’m interested to see what the radar module on this bird looks like. Without dropping tech data dose anyone have detection ranges on things like say an F-14?  How dose it do looking into the ground? What are to azmith limits? Basically if GCI puts me nose to nose against anything with a F model sparrow how even will the fight be? I know we have FC3 to look at, but I suspect the FF radar to be more detailed. 

[Harlikwin]

29 minutes ago, FlankerKiller said:

I’m interested to see what the radar module on this bird looks like. Without dropping tech data dose anyone have detection ranges on things like say an F-14?  How dose it do looking into the ground? What are to azmith limits? Basically if GCI puts me nose to nose against anything with a F model sparrow how even will the fight be? I know we have FC3 to look at, but I suspect the FF radar to be more detailed. 

The Azimuth limits in FC3 are correct AFAIK as is the overall mechanization, L/center/right (there is a switch on the front panel). The overall detection ranges in FC3 are about -ish right. Obviously FC3 doesn't account for RCS so I think they are just based the 3m^2 detection for fighters, so obviously flying tennis courts like the 14 and 15 should show up at somewhat longer ranges, while the F16 for example will a smidge less. Remember RCS/range scales by the 4th root so don't expect miracles, and the F14/15 will see you LOOONG before you will see them. 

it is a PD radar and it can look down. It has HPRF/MPRF though there were issues IIRC in MPRF. The one thing mentioned being the processor overloading in various situations (presumably high clutter ones). And this was corrected in the later 9.13 radar which had something like double the processing power. Also IIRC one of the bad situations was look down over swampy ground (again likely more clutter. The other obvious thing is that the inverted cassegrain antenna is gonna have way larger side lobes than planar antenna designs on western jets. So down low the range will be worse since it has to account for that noise/clutter and its receiver is gonna get overloaded at a higher alt than something with a planar antenna design. Again, the whole "cockroaching" meme we see in DCS with flankers/fulcrums just generally wasn't a thing IRL and is just a consequence of poor FC3 sensor modeling and the aero-quaker community looking for the best ways to exploit that. 

Mostly the radar mechanization sorta sucks from a control standpoint compared to western 4th gens, and while FC3 kina models it of course it has to be mapped to the hotas, when IRL it was in the front of the pit. You should ignore the FC3 lower limits, they are like +10 and -6 on the real thing and go in different steps (FC3 is 1k steps and exceeds the lower lookdown limit), the radar elevation knob is visible in the FC3 jet. Also I'd have to go back and check but I don't think the jet did auto IFF like just happens in FC3, and given the various co-location problems you see with this on good IFF/radar models like the M2k and the F15E it will be interesting to see if ED models it and how.

The general .02cent version is the Fulcrum is gonna suffer in BVR vs the big-nose 4th gens. Versus something like an F14/15 with a 7F (or even 7M since its time appropriate), assuming they are high and fast, they will shoot first since even the 7F outranges the 27R. So you are pretty much on the defensive. But the 27R is faster, so with creative maneuvering tactics to drop locks you can defend and still be in the fight, its just gonna be harder for you. BFM, you will have the advantage since you have the HMS and R73's. Though I imagine the HMS will be slightly more difficult to employ since it actually takes time to lock targets IRL versus the current instant FC3 lock.  

Edited January 10 by Harlikwin

[okopanja]

34 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

Though I imagine the HMS will be slightly more difficult to employ since it actually takes time to lock targets IRL versus the current instant FC3 lock.

Small correction: HMS is not a sensor, so therefore it does not lock anything, it just cues: radar, EOS or a missile seeker.

Regarding the DCS FC3 they do have the penalty when flying lower than 1500m

[Harlikwin]

1 minute ago, okopanja said:

Small correction: HMS is not a sensor, so therefore it does not lock anything, it just cues: radar, EOS or a missile seeker.

Regarding the DCS FC3 they do have the penalty when flying lower than 1500m

Yes yes, thanks for the clarification.

What has a penalty, the FC3 radar? really? 

 

[okopanja]

1 minute ago, Harlikwin said:

 

What has a penalty, the FC3 radar? really? 

Already now if the aircraft is close enough to the ground.

One thing is for sure: RWR, radar and EOS, as well as ground modes will have to be relearned. It will be familiar but in some cases surprisingly different environment.

[FlankerKiller]

Thanks. I’m not really doing anything with the FC3 version. I might dust it off to practice flying it but that’s about it. High and fast vs a Tomcat seems to be suicidal. So basically it’s live to the merge point and shoot.