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

[Harlikwin]

54 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

I've read from a source that the MiG-29 with the centerline external tank is limited to mach 0.9 while the external tank is attached, can anyone confirm this?

I wouldn't be surprised, there a bunch of limits with the tank. 

[okopanja]

13 minutes ago, Harlikwin said:

I wouldn't be surprised, there a bunch of limits with the tank. 

I wonder what different manuals say about same limitations types?

[AeriaGloria]

2 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

I've read from a source that the MiG-29 with the centerline external tank is limited to mach 0.9 while the external tank is attached, can anyone confirm this?

 

1 hour ago, okopanja said:

I wonder what different manuals say about same limitations types?

Manual says Mach 1.5 limit, limited to 4 G with fuel in the tank and no G limit if tank is empty. 
 

Drag index for center tank is 22, vs 8 for R-60, 12 for R-73, 17 for R-27R, and 230 for the whole aircraft 

[CrazyGman]

19 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

Manual says Mach 1.5 limit, limited to 4 G with fuel in the tank and no G limit if tank is empty. 

Yeah I was a bit dubious of this source, but I'm wondering where they got that number from

[AeriaGloria]

12 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

Yeah I was a bit dubious of this source, but I'm wondering where they got that number from

They are right that it restricts gun use unless you use a CL tank with a hole in it, but they are likely mixing it up with wing drop tanks, which do have a Mach 0.9 limit. 

[CrazyGman]

1 minute ago, AeriaGloria said:

They are right that it restricts gun use unless you use a CL tank with a hole in it

Makes sense with the wing tanks that were a later addition.

Not that i plan to use the gun with the tank attached, but why is the gun restricted, and why does a hole matter? 

[Harlikwin]

10 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

Makes sense with the wing tanks that were a later addition.

Not that i plan to use the gun with the tank attached, but why is the gun restricted, and why does a hole matter? 

Ejection I imagine. 

[AeriaGloria]

33 minutes ago, CrazyGman said:

Makes sense with the wing tanks that were a later addition.

Not that i plan to use the gun with the tank attached, but why is the gun restricted, and why does a hole matter? 

The gun shells are ejected behind the center line pylon. Pretty amazing they go that far back actually. But later fuel tanks had a square hole made in them so that the ejected shells go right through 

[some1]

9 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

Yeah I was a bit dubious of this source, but I'm wondering where they got that number from

The Polish manual for the early type indeed says 0.9M limit with the centreline tank, no G limit if empty, otherwise up to 4g. 

0.8M limit with A2G ordnance.

[CrazyGman]

On 1/18/2024 at 2:15 AM, some1 said:

The Polish manual for the early type indeed says 0.9M limit

So which is it then? Do we have conflicting information, or is something being misread. I'm inclined more that the 1.5 is more accurate, as fast interception is kinda the MiG-29s thing, and the MiG-21 didn'f have a speed restruction below mach 1 for it's external tanks, and i'm pretty sure neither did the MiG-23. For the external wing tanks I can see it, because those came after the initial design.

[some1]

16 hours ago, CrazyGman said:

is something being misread.

Different manuals from different years can have different numbers, there isn't much room for interpretation. It may be an early limit that was lifted in later years.

The fuel tank is a disposable item, by the time you reach supersonic it's empty anyway.

[CrazyGman]

2 hours ago, some1 said:

The fuel tank is a disposable item, by the time you reach supersonic it's empty anyway

Hardly...i tested it in game, max burner all the way struggling to keep it below 0.9 even in the climb to 30,000 feet, it still has a full minute worth of fuel in the centerline tank at full burner. It doesn't run out till i'm 40km away from my starting position at full burner the whole time with the climb to 30,000.

Again based on it's role, and compared to the limits of the MiG-21, and the other fighters before it, it seems at odds with the rapid response point defence interceptor.

Edited January 20, 2024 by CrazyGman

[some1]

The high performance intercept profile "by the book" is: takeoff, accelerate to 0.85M at 1000 meters, then climb to 10 km at 0.85M, then accelerate to supersonic speed in level flight.

Load the aircraft with missiles, subtract ~100 kg of fuel for startup and taxi, then try this profile. By the time you reach 10 km, the tank will be empty or nearly empty. 

 

[CrazyGman]

3 hours ago, some1 said:

The high performance intercept profile "by the book" is: takeoff, accelerate to 0.85M at 1000 meters, then climb to 10 km at 0.85M, then accelerate to supersonic speed in level flight.

Load the aircraft with missiles, subtract ~100 kg of fuel for startup and taxi, then try this profile. By the time you reach 10 km, the tank will be empty or nearly empty. 

 

Yeah I did, you still have over 50 seconds of fuel with full burner even with the startup and full loadout. Once you finish the climb the acceleration to supersonic is less then 10 seconds.

By that intercept profile you still have around 400 liters of fuel in the tank by the time you hit supersonic at 10 km altitude But you won't pass mach 1.4 before the tank is empty.

also above 30,000 feet the might be problems with the fuel flow from the centerline tank, as is stated in the german manual.

Edited January 20, 2024 by CrazyGman

[some1]

Not what I'm seeing, but nevermind, our experiments have to assume that DCS engine fuel consumption is dead on accurate.

Either way, both manuals agree that the maximum speed for safe droptank release is 0.85M, so if your goal is high performance intercept, you have to get rid of it before you go supersonic. There's no penalty for releasing the tank with some fuel left in it.

[okopanja]

An interesting possibility would be 9-12 with upgraded radar computer The original Ts-100 would be replaced with Ts-101/102 would be use which would eliminate the overload of targets (hello-TWS-not-dropped-with-ECM), introduce new modes as well enable compatibility with R-77, Kab-500.  Given the fact that overhaul of the 29s was due after ~9 years, these computers were available just in time when large of these fighters was supposed to be serviced.

[AeriaGloria]

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

 

Edited February 14, 2024 by AeriaGloria

[Kev2go]

its unfortunate its not the 9.13. lacking a jammer is less the ideal ( even the current less the stellar simulation of ECM) , when all other contemporary opponents have them, and as pointed out some 9.13's were modded with R77's which would also make an aircraft more competitive against Fox 3' carrying birds. However what else can be said then " it is what it is". This is most capable soviet/russian aircraft ED can simulate, so this is what the community has to settle for.  I hope that at least R27ER/ET are compatible with the 9.12 and it wont just be the shorter ranged 27R/T.

Edited February 18, 2024 by Kev2go

[Viper33]

19 minutes ago, Kev2go said:

its unfortunate its not the 9.13. lacking a jammer is less the ideal ( even the current less the stellar simulation of ECM) , when all other contemporary opponents have them, and as pointed out some 9.13's were modded with R77's which would also make an aircraft more competitive against Fox 3' carrying birds. However what else can be said then " it is what it is". This is most capable soviet/russian aircraft ED can simulate, so this is what the community has to settle for.  I hope that at least R27ER/ET are compatible with the 9.12 and it wont just be the shorter ranged 27R/T.

 

ER/ET are a given. Only 9.13S could use the 77 - not that many of those were built.

[strelok2014]

В 08.01.2024 в 17:08, Obic сказал:

DCS Best timeline is 1980 to 1995

MIG-29 is perfect for the 1983 to 1992 stretch that's 9+ years ....
Who's going to like it, People that understand it's basically a glorified Mig-21Bis and use it as such 
90% of the DCS Servers are made to cater to the  JDAM and 120c7 addicts
Enigma seems to be the only one to get this timeline concept
DDCS is not too bad because the Mig-29A and Mig-21 are put in as point defence fighter on advance airfield but it could really use the whole logistics of weapons and a smarter GCI

1980 to 1990
USN/USAF/USMC
F-18C is the closest opponent we have in the game for the time period. (Aim-9L + Aim-7F) later (Aim-9M + Aim7M) up to 1992
F-14A/B with similar loadout is the same. (Does shine in that era with the AIM-54)
F-16C Aim-9L or Aim-9M that's it. Until limited number of Aim-120B 1991+
AV8B could be loaded with a period correct loadout.
F-15E Aim-9M + Aim-7M + LGB + TGP that don't work over 15 000ft (Have fun with that)
The bad reputation is basically from the 100 vs 1 ratio the Iraq Airforce had to deal with.
A-4E Can be included with a stretch depending on country etc

Mirage F-1 All versions & weapons Fits right in 
Mirage 2000c Fit's right in with all weapons.

Mig-21Bis still fit's right in depending on country
Mig-23MLA Same
 

 

DCS: F/A-18C lot 20, F-16C block 50 and F-15E Suite4E+ has engines, radars and avionics 1992+. After 1990-1991 and the collapse of the Soviet Union, the development of military equipment in the USSR/Russia stopped abruptly. So, i think the best and fair timeline is <1989 (before aim-120, R-27ER(ET), R-77):
F-86F, F-100D, F-104, F-5E, AJS37, A-4E, Mirage F1, A-7E, F-4E, IAI Kfir, A-10A, F-15C, F-14A/B, AV-8B(NA), Mirage 2000C. (AIM-7M, AIM-54A(C), AIM-9M and old)
MiG-15bis, MiG-17F, MiG-19P, MiG-21bis, MiG-23MLA, MiG-29A (9-12), Su-25, Su-27P (R-24R(T), R-27R(T), R-60M, R-73 and old)

Edited March 12, 2024 by strelok2014

[okopanja]

On 2/19/2024 at 1:06 AM, Viper33 said:

ER/ET are a given. Only 9.13S could use the 77 - not that many of those were built.

Just for the sake of the clarity: there are 9.12 airframes capable of carrying R-77, after certain upgrades. However these upgrades are not part of the current scope. Maybe in future, who knows...

[JunMcKill]

23 minutes ago, okopanja said:

Just for the sake of the clarity: there are 9.12 airframes capable of carrying R-77, after certain upgrades. However these upgrades are not part of the current scope. Maybe in future, who knows...

The MIG-29SMT is the upgrade package for both original airframes and can carry R-77, quote from Wiki:

"The MiG-29SMT version is an upgrade package for the first generation MiG-29 (9.12 to 9.13) containing many of the improvements developed for the MiG-29M. Additional tanks included in a larger dorsal hump provide a maximum range of 2,100 km (without external tanks). The cockpit features improved HOTAS-type controls, two 152 × 203 mm color LCD multifunction displays and two smaller monochrome LCD displays. The upgraded Zhuk-ME radar offers similar characteristics to the MiG-29M. The engines are upgraded to the RD-33 Series 3 that offer an afterburning thrust of 8,300 kgf (81.4 kN) each. The weapons load is increased to 4,500 kg on six underwing pylons and one central pylon, with armament options similar to the MiG-29M variant. This update is also focused on accepting avionics and weapons of non-Russian origin."

[draconus]

3 minutes ago, JunMcKill said:

The MIG-29SMT is the upgrade package for both original airframes and can carry R-77

Any upgrade makes it a different variant. We're only getting MiG-29A 9.12, that's all there is to it.

[AeriaGloria]

20 minutes ago, JunMcKill said:

The MIG-29SMT is the upgrade package for both original airframes and can carry R-77, quote from Wiki:

"The MiG-29SMT version is an upgrade package for the first generation MiG-29 (9.12 to 9.13) containing many of the improvements developed for the MiG-29M. Additional tanks included in a larger dorsal hump provide a maximum range of 2,100 km (without external tanks). The cockpit features improved HOTAS-type controls, two 152 × 203 mm color LCD multifunction displays and two smaller monochrome LCD displays. The upgraded Zhuk-ME radar offers similar characteristics to the MiG-29M. The engines are upgraded to the RD-33 Series 3 that offer an afterburning thrust of 8,300 kgf (81.4 kN) each. The weapons load is increased to 4,500 kg on six underwing pylons and one central pylon, with armament options similar to the MiG-29M variant. This update is also focused on accepting avionics and weapons of non-Russian origin."

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

[okopanja]

19 minutes ago, draconus said:

Any upgrade makes it a different variant. We're only getting MiG-29A 9.12, that's all there is to it.

Let's wait for Mig-29A in its original form, but I would not go so far to claim we will not see sub-variants based on upgrades. 

We know that DCS allows for sub-variants within the same module (several examples already), so I would not be too surprised if this occurs with Mig-29 in future. Upgrades that were offered or implemented did range from under-the-hood changes (e.g. making longer ranged more ECM resistant radar capable of guiding R-77), toward relatively minor cockpit modifications (e.g. replaced HUD repeater with MFI-55) toward really comprehensive changes where the cockpit is radically changed (SMT).