MiG29 SMT module /New rules

[ESA_maligno]

With the arrival of modules such as the F35, where the requirements of documentation and information sources are less demanding; I think a "dow of opportunity" opens for projects such as the modernized version of the MiG29; especially with the shortcomings that exist in DCSW if we compare the "blue side with the red side". Projects like VinntoreZ's would be a great starting point.

[WarbossPetross]

2 часа назад, ESA_maligno сказал:

With the arrival of modules such as the F35, where the requirements of documentation and information sources are less demanding; I think a "dow of opportunity" opens for projects such as the modernized version of the MiG29; especially with the shortcomings that exist in DCSW if we compare the "blue side with the red side". Projects like VinntoreZ's would be a great starting point.

No, it doesn't. Russian classified info rules != American classified info rules, and none of them are made with game balance in mind. You are entitled to nothing© If we're talking multiplayer then Fat Amy will only be present on PvE servers and dogfight servers where everything goes. Not that I mind more red modules, but we'll get them when they can make them. And we still can't have MiG-23 for crying out loud!

[Ironhand]

6 hours ago, ESA_maligno said:

With the arrival of modules such as the F35…

Well…it’s certainly going to open Pandora’s box.

[TotenDead]

We won't get any new capabilities with 29SMT. Yes, it will have access to guided a2g, but a2a will still be limited to 1980s R-77s. Now, MiG-29K/M2 - that's a different story

[AeriaGloria]

50 minutes ago, TotenDead said:

We won't get any new capabilities with 29SMT. Yes, it will have access to guided a2g, but a2a will still be limited to 1980s R-77s. Now, MiG-29K/M2 - that's a different story

What, are you thinking 29K/M would get R-77-1 or something? 

[Pikey]

This thread assumes secret systems, features and kits haven't been simulated before.

They have, there's nothing new in another platform with secret stuff. ED simplifies and extrapolates all the time. From WW2 where the plane is not available anymore (FW190) to RWR behaviour, to sensor performance to weapons like AMRAAM. If this comes as a surprise, I hope your reality and immersion remain intact, but F-35 isn't changing anything significantly. This is what ED does, its its magic trick. It makes the simulation immerse and you feel its real. THose that can, will advise, those that know know better will attempt to bend their reality to whatever works for them.

[MA_VMF]

57 минут назад, AeriaGloria сказал:

What, are you thinking 29K/M would get R-77-1 or something? 

yep

[mgabriel93]

5 hours ago, Ironhand said:

Well…it’s certainly going to open Pandora’s box.

I hope it's the case. We need more redfor planes, and they won't come unless the Pandora's box is open.

If we're going to have a Dynamic Campaign with a fictional war on a fictional Fulda Gap, I don't care about a fictional MiG-29 SMT. It isn't like I need training to fly a real one any time soon

[sleestak]

9 hours ago, WarbossPetross said:

No, it doesn't. Russian classified info rules != American classified info rules, and none of them are made with game balance in mind. You are entitled to nothing© If we're talking multiplayer then Fat Amy will only be present on PvE servers and dogfight servers where everything goes. Not that I mind more red modules, but we'll get them when they can make them. And we still can't have MiG-23 for crying out loud!

I generally agree with what you are saying, but a great deal of what ED needs to implement with the F-35 has to be assumed because it is, in fact, classified. The intricacies of Russian versus American classified rules aren't the question here because that information isn't being utilized in either case. What's the difference between making assumptions about Russian classified systems and Western classified systems as long as you're able to prove you haven't obtained and utilized controlled access information?

I personally think the F-35 is the most boring module choice imaginable...fly-by-wire, very low-observability, staring at multiple small screens represented on your screen, and a nothing but guided stand-off weapons to watch on those small screens is just boring to me That said, I would much rather have a MiG-29K or MiG-35 if we are going down the assumed performance and characteristics route...but I'm probably preaching to the choir in this sub-forum

[rob10]

1 hour ago, sleestak said:

What's the difference between making assumptions about Russian classified systems and Western classified systems as long as you're able to prove you haven't obtained and utilized controlled access information?

A: Russian has much different laws versus the west, so even making stuff up could get you jailed

B: good luck actually proving that in a Russian court anyway (see A).

[TotenDead]

54 минуты назад, rob10 сказал:

A: Russian has much different laws versus the west, so even making stuff up could get you jailed

B: good luck actually proving that in a Russian court anyway (see A).

A: I believe it would be fair to say that you're a little delusional

B: see A

[F-2]

There is a publicly available SMT radar export manual. Not  restricted. ED has a copy.

[Flogger23m]

It would be nice to see, even if limited to a lower fidelity FC style aircraft. Likewise for an Su-27SM/SM2. There might not be enough public info to make the more modern variations, so they can always do a full fidelity MIG-29A and Su-27S, and then later build off those modules and make simplified lower fidelity modernized versions when they cannot be done as full fidelity modules. I'm sure both will sell.

[F-2]

8 hours ago, Flogger23m said:

It would be nice to see, even if limited to a lower fidelity FC style aircraft. Likewise for an Su-27SM/SM2. There might not be enough public info to make the more modern variations, so they can always do a full fidelity MIG-29A and Su-27S, and then later build off those modules and make simplified lower fidelity modernized versions when they cannot be done as full fidelity modules. I'm sure both will sell.

If you want a Su-27sm I would consider holding out. I see people getting Su-30mk stuff in their respective countries all the time. I don’t think it’s particularly secret and it has nearly the same avionics as the SM. I think it’s just a matter of time.

[Creampie]

On 1/17/2025 at 6:06 AM, WarbossPetross said:

No, it doesn't. Russian classified info rules != American classified info rules, and none of them are made with game balance in mind. You are entitled to nothing© If we're talking multiplayer then Fat Amy will only be present on PvE servers and dogfight servers where everything goes. Not that I mind more red modules, but we'll get them when they can make them. And we still can't have MiG-23 for crying out loud!

 

A lot of people tend to forget that this is a PVE game. 

We are just fortunate enough to have server owners making PVP servers.

I most certainly understand the concern of the OP. Current DCS as far as PVP goes, red is signifigantly lacking. 

Nevermind the F35 gimmick.

The EF tipped any sort of "balance" or parity for PVP servers in a modern/80s enviroment that is already teetering.

ED Follows their consumer market, Blue PVE players. Like any business should.

ED is also missing a pretty large consumer market with "red" enjoyers & PVP players by adding these modules.

They are also pushing their PVE playbase (the majority) to F35s fighting Mig29s that don't hold a candle.

There is no "we'll get them when they can make them". They announced building a module they have very little accurate data on.

Russia saying no is just not a valid argument anymore.

 

So, Su30 & J10 when? 

21 hours ago, AeriaGloria said:

What, are you thinking 29K/M would get R-77-1 or something? 

Imagine

[Ironhand]

18 hours ago, mgabriel93 said:

I hope it's the case. We need more redfor planes, and they won't come unless the Pandora's box is open.

If we're going to have a Dynamic Campaign with a fictional war on a fictional Fulda Gap, I don't care about a fictional MiG-29 SMT. It isn't like I need training to fly a real one any time soon

Oh…that’s not the Pandora’s box I was referring to.

[bies]

First - MiG-29SMT is a fat, overweight pig, disliked by the pilots. It has the worst kinematic performance, acceleration, maneuverability among whole MiG-29 family. The worst T/W and the worst wing loading. It's even the worst looking with disproportionate humpback.   When original 9.12 was one of the best looking jetfighter ever.

 

Second - making F-35 without full documentation already sparks controversy - and there's a whole lot of information about the F-35 publicly available, and openness of the producer to share all non-classified components, logic, workflows, HOTAS, avionics etc., as this is world wide exported whole NATO fighter produced in 1100 pieces already.

At the same time there is close to zero MiG-29SMT information available, everything would be totally made up, its avionics, MFD pages, weapon systems, HOTAS functions - it would be a sad joke. Completely fictional abomination not better than amateur-made MODs already free to download.

[F-2]

2 hours ago, bies said:

First - MiG-29SMT is a fat, overweight pig, disliked by the pilots. It has the worst kinematic performance, acceleration, maneuverability among whole MiG-29 family. The worst T/W and the worst wing loading. It's even the worst looking with disproportionate humpback.   When original 9.12 was one of the best looking jetfighter ever.

 

Second - making F-35 without full documentation already sparks controversy - and there's a whole lot of information about the F-35 publicly available, and openness of the producer to share all non-classified components, logic, workflows, HOTAS, avionics etc., as this is world wide exported whole NATO fighter produced in 1100 pieces already.

At the same time there is close to zero MiG-29SMT information available, everything would be totally made up, its avionics, MFD pages, weapon systems, HOTAS functions - it would be a sad joke. Completely fictional abomination not better than amateur-made MODs already free to download.

Do one with no hump then

[Flogger23m]

5 hours ago, F-2 said:

Do one with no hump then

 

This might be a newer model though the pictures claim it is a prototype, not a production aircraft. The SMT in service have the large humps on them. There are other modernized MIG-29s like the MIG-29BM which is supposedly similar to the SMT. Though it is used by Belarus and I doubt there is much info on it, and only a handful exist.

A better option for a modernized MIG-29s would be the MIG-29K or MIG-29M/M2. Both are production planes in service in decent sized numbers. MIG-29K is used by Russia and India, while the MIG-29M/M2 is used by Egypt, Algeria & a handful by Russia.

If not enough info exists, well, they can be made into lower fidelity modules and I'm sure they would sell. Makes a lot of sense. For those that like full fidelity modules, they can get the MIG-29A, for those that like more modern/lower fidelity, they can get the modern variants. And plenty of people will likely buy both.

Edited January 18 by Flogger23m

[F-2]

34 minutes ago, Flogger23m said:

 

This might be a newer model though the pictures claim it is a prototype, not a production aircraft. The SMT in service have the large humps on them. There are other modernized MIG-29s like the MIG-29BM which is supposedly similar to the SMT. Though it is used by Belarus and I doubt there is much info on it, and only a handful exist.

A better option for a modernized MIG-29s would be the MIG-29K or MIG-29M/M2. Both are production planes in service in decent sized numbers. MIG-29K is used by Russia and India, while the MIG-29M/M2 is used by Egypt, Algeria & a handful by Russia.

If not enough info exists, well, they can be made into lower fidelity modules and I'm sure they would sell. Makes a lot of sense. For those that like full fidelity modules, they can get the MIG-29A, for those that like more modern/lower fidelity, they can get the modern variants. And plenty of people will likely buy both.

This is 9.18 which doesn’t have the hump 9.19 has the hump. 9.18 is used by Yemen and Eritrea. 

[Kraken_ZA]

On 1/17/2025 at 5:21 PM, TotenDead said:

We won't get any new capabilities with 29SMT. Yes, it will have access to guided a2g, but a2a will still be limited to 1980s R-77s. Now, MiG-29K/M2 - that's a different story

The R-77 was only introduced in 1994.

[TotenDead]

4 часа назад, Kraken_ZA сказал:

The R-77 was only introduced in 1994.

All military tech development stalled around 1989-90 due to politics. It was tested in the 80s And is actually late 80s level of soviet technology

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 hour ago, TotenDead said:

All military tech development stalled around 1989-90 due to politics. It was tested in the 80s And is actually late 80s level of soviet technology

Yes and as far as I understand, never actually used by the Russians until the R-77-1 entered service in the 2000s.
But then again, the sandbox that is DCS shouldn't care about geopolitics and macroeconomics and just give us the tools as they were available, whether actually used or not.

[TotenDead]

12 минут назад, Raven (Elysian Angel) сказал:

Yes and as far as I understand, never actually used by the Russians until the R-77-1 entered service in the 2000s.
But then again, the sandbox that is DCS shouldn't care about geopolitics and macroeconomics and just give us the tools as they were available, whether actually used or not.

Yep. But the point was that SMT won't really give us anything new in terms of a2a combat and 29M/K would. The latter one would equalize the disparity of BVR engagements while still being something of the FF F-15/16C level. A better option gameplay wise in my opinion, equally matched to what we have right now in the game

[Kraken_ZA]

6 hours ago, TotenDead said:

All military tech development stalled around 1989-90 due to politics. It was tested in the 80s And is actually late 80s level of soviet technology

In engineering you don't timestamp products when you start development as development happens continuously until it concludes, the R-77 only concluded development in the early 90's thus its a product of the 90's. A major delay for the R-77 was the decision to move from an OKB to a production association in 1992.

Edited January 19 by Kraken_ZA