correct as-is DCS MiG-29A Flight performance and air drag seems weird

[HoMeBoY]

Premise, I fly almost all DCS modules and I have 5+ years in the sim to what I consider a professional level. I am also a student pilot.

I understand the flight model is the same as FC and it was considered more than good and realistic already, but right now the MiG-29A behaves completely different from any other module. For example:
- it's very difficult to bleed air speed, even when idle and pitching up. And it seems it never really stalls and not even buffet. I could fly at around 120kts easily but it seems a very low speed to me
- because of the difficulty of bleeding air speed, landings are weird and generally flat and it float forever
- you can flare on land and then keep the nose up almost forever
- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft
- the jet overall seems faster and agile of anything else out ther in DCS. 

I don't know how a MiG29 is in real life and to be honest I would expect this kind of performance from a modern military jet, but then all the others modules like F/A-18 and F-16 must be wrong then as they have less performance than the MiG29.

In general I find F-16, F-14 and F-4 (in general Heatblur modules) to be the best transmitting realistic reactions and performances when it comes to modern jets....so TLDR, this MiG29A left me perplexed as it feels very arcade to me

 

[BIGNEWY]

Hi, 

please include a track replay on Caucasus showing the issue and we can review it. 

If you have any public evidence to support your claims please dm me, but comparing to other modules isnt probably a good idea, each aircraft has its quirks and characteristics. 

thank you  

[HoMeBoY]

Hi thanks for the reply. Tonight I will record a client track from the Caucasus Free Flight and Landing from Final Approach instant missions and leave some comments about my experience.

I am not "claiming anything", it was rather to get other opinions from the community. Even if I don't compare modules, it will feel overpowered in terms of pure flying performances when joining an MP server with diverse adversaries.

Lastly, I understand it just came out in EA and I am just hoping it will reach the same level of polish as other modules. Something that the MiG29 is already doing better than the Phantom for example are the water drops effect on the canopy.

[BIGNEWY]

No worries, we are happy to look at the track and investigate.

 

[Hiob]

52 minutes ago, HoMeBoY said:

Premise, I fly almost all DCS modules and I have 5+ years in the sim to what I consider a professional level. I am also a student pilot.

I understand the flight model is the same as FC and it was considered more than good and realistic already, but right now the MiG-29A behaves completely different from any other module. For example:
- it's very difficult to bleed air speed, even when idle and pitching up. And it seems it never really stalls and not even buffet. I could fly at around 120kts easily but it seems a very low speed to me
- because of the difficulty of bleeding air speed, landings are weird and generally flat and it float forever
- you can flare on land and then keep the nose up almost forever
- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft
- the jet overall seems faster and agile of anything else out ther in DCS. 

I don't know how a MiG29 is in real life and to be honest I would expect this kind of performance from a modern military jet, but then all the others modules like F/A-18 and F-16 must be wrong then as they have less performance than the MiG29.

In general I find F-16, F-14 and F-4 (in general Heatblur modules) to be the best transmitting realistic reactions and performances when it comes to modern jets....so TLDR, this MiG29A left me perplexed as it feels very arcade to me

 

The high lift and thrust seem consistent with what the Fulcrum is known for (I don't have any data, just from hearsay)....
However, I would agree, that it seems almost impossible (in comparison) to bleed speed. 

[primus_TR]

53 minutes ago, HoMeBoY said:

Premise, I fly almost all DCS modules and I have 5+ years in the sim to what I consider a professional level. I am also a student pilot.

I understand the flight model is the same as FC and it was considered more than good and realistic already, but right now the MiG-29A behaves completely different from any other module. For example:
- it's very difficult to bleed air speed, even when idle and pitching up. And it seems it never really stalls and not even buffet. I could fly at around 120kts easily but it seems a very low speed to me
- because of the difficulty of bleeding air speed, landings are weird and generally flat and it float forever
- you can flare on land and then keep the nose up almost forever
- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft
- the jet overall seems faster and agile of anything else out ther in DCS. 

Very similar to F16, which is not surprising in my opinion. 

[Hiob]

Just now, primus_TR said:

Very similar to F16, which is not surprising in my opinion. 

Bleeding speed in the Viper is a piece of cake. Especially when dirty. Try a back to back comparison with the Fulcrum.

From my (very subjective) pov, the Viper feels "right", whereas the Fulcrum feels like it was covered in butter. Very slippery. 

[The Gryphon]

If I recal correctly, isn't MIG-29A a pretty small and light aircraft (like the F-16) but in comparision with the F-16 it has two engines, perhaps it explains the high thrust to weight ratio.

The MIG-29 has a pretty wide fuselage blended with large wings, perhaps that explains the high lift?

[primus_TR]

Well, the 29a can reach Mach 2.3 for a reason.

[Hiob]

1 minute ago, primus_TR said:

Well, the 29a can reach Mach 2.3 for a reason.

True, but with gear and flaps down, it should still bleed speed like crazy (in idle).

[The Gryphon]

Just now, primus_TR said:

Well, the 29a can reach Mach 2.3 for a reason.

Yes I exactly. If you compare the F-14 and MIG-29, they have both two engines, but the MIG is much smaller (and has less weight) that could explain it.

MIG-29A must be the smallest aircraft in DCS with two engines mounted?

Just now, Hiob said:

True, but with gear and flaps down, it should still bleed speed like crazy (in idle).

True

[Qiou87]

1 hour ago, HoMeBoY said:

Premise, I fly almost all DCS modules and I have 5+ years in the sim to what I consider a professional level. I am also a student pilot.

I understand the flight model is the same as FC and it was considered more than good and realistic already, but right now the MiG-29A behaves completely different from any other module. For example:
- it's very difficult to bleed air speed, even when idle and pitching up. And it seems it never really stalls and not even buffet. I could fly at around 120kts easily but it seems a very low speed to me
- because of the difficulty of bleeding air speed, landings are weird and generally flat and it float forever
- you can flare on land and then keep the nose up almost forever
- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft
- the jet overall seems faster and agile of anything else out ther in DCS. 

I don't know how a MiG29 is in real life and to be honest I would expect this kind of performance from a modern military jet, but then all the others modules like F/A-18 and F-16 must be wrong then as they have less performance than the MiG29.

In general I find F-16, F-14 and F-4 (in general Heatblur modules) to be the best transmitting realistic reactions and performances when it comes to modern jets....so TLDR, this MiG29A left me perplexed as it feels very arcade to me

 

If I understand you well, you have 2 main points:

- the jet doesn't degrade speed like you expect ; in this area I would say we are probably poorly equipped to judge as it is not very comparable in terms of aerodynamic design to the US jets you mention. For example the wing area of the Mig-29 is 38m², compared to 28m² on the F-16. My understanding is that the flight model is done based on publicly available data, which is plentiful considering the age of the jet. But I could be wrong here.

- the jet's performance is "too fast". The fastest jet in DCS so far was the F-16C (in a drag race) with a thrust-to-weight ratio of 1.08 considering a clean jet with full internal fuel. The MiG-29A has 1.12 in the same configuration. Based on videos like GR's drag race test, the MiG-29 actually performs as one of the best, but not the best fighter in pure performance. The fact that it performs well at high altitude is probably due to its relatively larger wing area compared to its weight (it has a very similar empty weight to the F/A-18, similar wing area as well, but 0,5t higher thrust in full afterburner).

All data comes from Wikipedia.

[Кош]

It would be more efficient to base expectations for a DCS MiG on a docs for a real MiG. MiG-29 and F/A-18 or F-16 are different aircraft with different performances, you can't say "It's a bugged model because it climbs faster than F-16", better say "It's a bugged model because it climbs faster than a real MiG-29 here's the graph's superposition of real and model". Now that would be "professional level".

 

Edited 8 hours ago by Кош

[okopanja]

3 hours ago, HoMeBoY said:

- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft

 

 

[AeriaGloria]

4 hours ago, HoMeBoY said:

Premise, I fly almost all DCS modules and I have 5+ years in the sim to what I consider a professional level. I am also a student pilot.

I understand the flight model is the same as FC and it was considered more than good and realistic already, but right now the MiG-29A behaves completely different from any other module. For example:
- it's very difficult to bleed air speed, even when idle and pitching up. And it seems it never really stalls and not even buffet. I could fly at around 120kts easily but it seems a very low speed to me
- because of the difficulty of bleeding air speed, landings are weird and generally flat and it float forever
- you can flare on land and then keep the nose up almost forever
- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft
- the jet overall seems faster and agile of anything else out ther in DCS. 

I don't know how a MiG29 is in real life and to be honest I would expect this kind of performance from a modern military jet, but then all the others modules like F/A-18 and F-16 must be wrong then as they have less performance than the MiG29.

In general I find F-16, F-14 and F-4 (in general Heatblur modules) to be the best transmitting realistic reactions and performances when it comes to modern jets....so TLDR, this MiG29A left me perplexed as it feels very arcade to me

 

The aero manual says the controls have good authority even below 200 kmh. 
 

The engines do have a high thrust in idle 

It should sustain AB climb at peak climb speed (Mach 0.9-0.95) up to 50,000 feet, and still climb higher as long as speed is higher 

It should buffet around 15 degrees, you can feel it with FFB. 
 

I think you will find that DCS F-18 still out turns it in every way. 

 

[MAXsenna]

4 hours ago, Hiob said:

the Fulcrum feels like it was covered in butter.

Never heard about Grease Lightning? 

[Hiob]

27 minutes ago, AeriaGloria said:

The aero manual says the controls have good authority even below 200 kmh.  => 111 kts

The engines do have a high thrust in idle 

It should sustain AB climb at peak climb speed (Mach 0.9-0.95) up to 50,000 feet, and still climb higher as long as speed is higher  ...need to try that 

It should buffet around 15 degrees, you can feel it with FFB.  -> can confirm!
 

I think you will find that DCS F-18 still out turns it in every way. 

 

Any thoughts on the apparent "lack" of drag when dirty, or do you think it's a function of the high idle thrust?

2 minutes ago, MAXsenna said:

Never heard about Grease Lightning? 

[Bremspropeller]

9 minutes ago, Hiob said:

Any thoughts on the apparent "lack" of drag when dirty, or do you think it's a function of the high idle thrust?

You can see on the final-turn video above, that the throttle throughout the turn was below 80%. It is a very efficient airframe and the motors do have quite a bit of thrust in idle.

Now for something completely different:
What do landing-flaps actually do? There's no apparent difference to T/O flaps for me.
Is that a controller bug? I saw a topic in the bugs section about that.

[Hiob]

1 minute ago, Bremspropeller said:

What do landing-flaps actually do? There's no apparent difference to T/O flaps for me.
Is that a controller bug? I saw a topic in the bugs section about that.

Not sure if related, but I noticed that too.

[Кош]

18 минут назад, Bremspropeller сказал:

You can see on the final-turn video above, that the throttle throughout the turn was below 80%. It is a very efficient airframe and the motors do have quite a bit of thrust in idle.

Now for something completely different:
What do landing-flaps actually do? There's no apparent difference to T/O flaps for me.
Is that a controller bug? I saw a topic in the bugs section about that.

It's an artifact of using an off the shelf flaps panel. In reality there is only two positions of flaps, in and out. Both TO and Land buttons do the same thing.

Edited 5 hours ago by Кош

[BIGNEWY]

15 minutes ago, Кош said:

It's an artifact of using an off the shelf flaps panel. In reality there is only two positions of flaps, in and out. Both TO and Land buttons do the same thing.

Hi, 

takeoff and landing schedule the leading edge flaps differently. 

[primus_TR]

5 hours ago, Hiob said:

From my (very subjective) pov, the Viper feels "right", whereas the Fulcrum feels like it was covered in butter. Very slippery. 

It is a slick bird for sure. 

[The Gryphon]

Interesting interview with a Fulcrum- pilot describing the insaine alpha capabilities against western jets, scroll to 35 min 15 sek in video  26 min 30 sek also great

 

 

Edited 3 hours ago by The Gryphon
Spelling errors

[Кош]

1 час назад, BIGNEWY сказал:

Hi, 

takeoff and landing schedule the leading edge flaps differently. 

It's a known claim but no. Already solved in Ru part of forums with SME and mechanical scheme. There is phisically two positions for flap, and leading edge - leading edge is scheduled independently for optimal performance at all times.

Edited 3 hours ago by Кош

[Ironhand]

7 hours ago, HoMeBoY said:

…
I understand the flight model is the same as FC and it was considered more than good and realistic already, but right now the MiG-29A behaves completely different from any other module. For example:
- it's very difficult to bleed air speed, even when idle and pitching up. And it seems it never really stalls and not even buffet. I could fly at around 120kts easily but it seems a very low speed to me
- because of the difficulty of bleeding air speed, landings are weird and generally flat and it float forever
- you can flare on land and then keep the nose up almost forever
- you can sustain AB climb, sometimes supersonic, way past 35,000ft
- the jet overall seems faster and agile of anything else out ther in DCS. 

I don't know how a MiG29 is in real life and to be honest I would expect this kind of performance from a modern military jet, but then all the others modules like F/A-18 and F-16 must be wrong then as they have less performance than the MiG29.

In general I find F-16, F-14 and F-4 (in general Heatblur modules) to be the best transmitting realistic reactions and performances when it comes to modern jets....so TLDR, this MiG29A left me perplexed as it feels very arcade to me

 

Point 1: The flight model is the same as the FC model. Yes and no. It’s probably more accurate to say that the FC model is now the same as the FF module. I’ve noticed changes to the FC model, since work began on the FF module.

Point 2: It seems too slick compared to other aircraft. I guess I never felt that way. It a fairly lightweight aircraft with large engines for its size and not a lot of drag at higher speeds. So it was kind of what I’d expect. Without that airbrake out, it can take awhile to slow down.

Point 3: Landing. It’ll float forever, if you’re landing too fast for your weight. With 30-ish% fuel and 2 AAMs you should be touching down around 265 km/hr. With less, you should be seeing 250-260 on the HUD. Don’t know if that’s your issue but it is for a lot of folks.

My 2 cents.