MiG-29"A" isn't a MiG-29A

[TotenDead]

13 часов назад, Dragon1-1 сказал:

Zuyev's account seems to indicate they did like the name Fulcrum and used it sometimes. Same as with Su-27, that one also got a cool name. "Bear" for the Tu-95 also quickly got traction once the crews found out about it.

You can use the search option in the russian part of the forum, check the popularity of the word fulcrum

[Dragon1-1]

What random Russian people say on an internet forum is not necessarily an indication of what RL MiG drivers from Russian AF say, or what the Soviet ones used to say. Besides, since MiG-23 is long retired and MiG-27 is obscure, I suspect "the MiG" works for most people these days.

[MA_VMF]

В 29.09.2025 в 13:17, Northstar98 сказал:

Hi everyone,

I appreciate this is minor (though on the flip-side, fixing it is trivial), but what we have in DCS is not a MiG-29A.

IRL the actual MiG-29A (product 9-11A) was a speculative concept from the 1970s that was never built beyond small, scale models.

Here's what it may have looked like if it was ever actually built (note 29A written on the nose):

This was essentially a stop-gap aircraft, using avionics (including the radar) of late MiG-23ML aircraft (and you can see an R-23R missile depicted under each wing). This model can also be seen in the documentary Wings of the Red Star - the Last Generation about the MiG-29 and Su-27.

Here's another image showing prospective loadouts (including the K-25 - more-or-less a copy of the AIM-7 Sparrow), here depicted with semi-recessed stations on the corners of the engine nacelles - much like the Hornet (though you can find numerous other MiG-29A designs - such as this one and even this SAAB 35 Draken-looking one

Note how "радиолоцанная станция" (radar station) is listed as "САПФИР-23М" i.e SAPFIR-23M. SAPFIR-23 being the radar fitted to the MiG-23.

What we have in DCS is actually just "MiG-29". I'd propose renaming it to "MiG-29 (9-12A)" or "MiG-29 (9-12A) Fulcrum-A", as that's where the As actually belong and this is what the aircraft actually is. Including Fulcrum-A is out of convention for DCS (though DCS' naming convention is inconsistent to begin with), though were it to be done, I'd include NATO reporting names for all Soviet/Russian/Chinese aircraft, as has been done with some ground units.

The Ural-375s got corrected to what they actually are (Ural-4320s), let's hope this can get corrected too.

I've attached a modified MiG-29-Fulcrum.lua (ironically, the name of the .lua file gets it right), changing line 410 to have a more accurate display name that fixes the issue - this resides inside CoreMods\aircraft\MiG-29-Fulcrum (ironically the name of the .lua file and the name of the folder gets it right).

This will break the Integrity Checker so ensure to retain a back-up of the original.

  Показать контент

And, in a similar breath:

• The HY-2 is neither a Silkworm or an SS-N-2 Styx. Its actual NATO designation is CSSC-3 Seersucker.
• The Chieftain Mk.3 is not a Mk.3
• The U-Boat U-Flak absolutely isn't a U-Flak. 

MiG-29-Fulcrum.lua 38.4 \u043a\u0411 · 4 загрузки

The picture you have is an 1972 avant-projet, and it has nothing to do with a production aircraft.

[Raven (Elysian Angel)]

1 hour ago, MA_VMF said:

The picture you have is an 1972 avant-projet, and it has nothing to do with a production aircraft.

Yes, that’s the point of this thread