Flight Model Discussion

[Aware29]

Just wanted to start a discussion on people’s thoughts and observations on the flight model. 
One thing that immediately jumped out to me during my testing is the proverse yaw. In low to medium AoAs the aircraft has a pretty strong proverse yaw response. Which I found a bit surprising, considering the MiG 29 uses spoilers and a bit of differential stabilizer to roll the aircraft. I read in the real world manual about the spoilers being up 5 degrees from neutral to help reduce adverse yaw, but nothing about eliminating it or proverse yaw. I’m not saying this is unrealistic, as I don’t know, just that I would think the aircraft would have adverse yaw instead of proverse. 
Anyone out there that perhaps knows any real MiG drivers that can ask if this is indeed accurate? Or if someone has a manual that describes this characteristic?

I saw GVad the Pilots YouTube video about the flight model. Seems to be slightly underperforming in high speed flight as well?

All in all it does feel great to fly! Doing tail slides is fun and it seems to behave just like how you see in real videos from airshows 

[YoYo]

You're probably talking about the before-1 patch video, here's the after video, it looks pretty good:

 

[AeriaGloria]

The only thing I notice it’s turning behavior. According to charts it should hit sustained 9 G right at 900 kmh, and maintain max G until supersonic speed. Right now it stops maintaining 9 G will before supersonic speed

[NineLine]

1 hour ago, AeriaGloria said:

The only thing I notice it’s turning behavior. According to charts it should hit sustained 9 G right at 900 kmh, and maintain max G until supersonic speed. Right now it stops maintaining 9 G will before supersonic speed

Sadly, this is a very vague comment; without knowing drag index, gross weight, altitude, and throttle setting, we really can't say if there is an issue or now, as well as what charts you are referencing, etc. 

[AeriaGloria]

1 hour ago, NineLine said:

Sadly, this is a very vague comment; without knowing drag index, gross weight, altitude, and throttle setting, we really can't say if there is an issue or now, as well as what charts you are referencing, etc. 

I am referencing German TO-1 that can be purchased from Amazon and also appears in the L-18 manual which can also be purchased on Amazon, and most importantly the instantaneous G chart from the same German TO-1 that can be purchased on Amazon. As well as many comments in practical aerodynamics saying it is not until you hit transonic speeds that the elevator loses efficiency and stops you from pulling max G. This sustained turn chart shows both drag and gross weight and so should be able to atleast hit those numbers. The instantaneous G chart doesn’t say exactly drag and weight just “clean or with missiles”, but if it’s like every other single chart it is for 2x R-73, 4x pylons, and 13,000 kg weight with approximately 1,500 kg fuel. Either way it should hit these numbers at some point in the flight envelope. The creators of the chart clearly thought it correct enough for a wide enough range to say “clean or with missile load CG 25.5%”
 

Notice how at low altitudes it has no  problem hitting max G until is just past Mach 0.85 This is also the exact reason the ARU system is tuned to start giving authority back at 1200 kmh. 
 

On second look it does seem to hit these numbers pretty well for the instantaneous chart right at sea level, but it does seem to be under doing max G at the 3-5 km lines in game. I do not about the sustained chart 

 

Edited 28 minutes ago by AeriaGloria

[Cgjunk2]

7 hours ago, Aware29 said:

Just wanted to start a discussion on people’s thoughts and observations on the flight model. 
One thing that immediately jumped out to me during my testing is the proverse yaw. In low to medium AoAs the aircraft has a pretty strong proverse yaw response. Which I found a bit surprising, considering the MiG 29 uses spoilers and a bit of differential stabilizer to roll the aircraft. I read in the real world manual about the spoilers being up 5 degrees from neutral to help reduce adverse yaw, but nothing about eliminating it or proverse yaw. I’m not saying this is unrealistic, as I don’t know, just that I would think the aircraft would have adverse yaw instead of proverse. 
Anyone out there that perhaps knows any real MiG drivers that can ask if this is indeed accurate? Or if someone has a manual that describes this characteristic?

I saw GVad the Pilots YouTube video about the flight model. Seems to be slightly underperforming in high speed flight as well?

All in all it does feel great to fly! Doing tail slides is fun and it seems to behave just like how you see in real videos from airshows 

I don’t if I’m missing something or if I’m losing it, but the Mig29 doesn’t control roll through spoilers.  It uses ailerons.  

Also, I haven’t heard the word “proverse” being used to described yaw tendencies.  Generally speaking, adverse yaw occurs when ailerons are responsible for commanding the roll.  Ailerons will always cause induced drag on the wing that rises because anything being lifted has more lift, and therefore more drag.  That drag “pulls” the lifting wing backwards, which is the same thing as saying it yaws the airplane opposite of the roll direction.   I know aerodynamics are complicated (especially on fighters), but I don’t think it possible for ailerons (being used on their own) to induce a yaw into the roll direction.  

The “proverse” yaw you’re seeing is probably the rudder input being commanded by the FCS/stabilazation system.  Most large/heavy airplanes have some sort of system that commands inside rudder to cancel out the adverse yaw and keep the turn coordinated.

Recently I did see someone comment about both ailerons both resting at a positive angle for the purpose increasing the washout effect of the wing as a whole.  Washout describes the amount if twist built into a wing.  With the twist resulting in a wing that has less AOA near the tips, than it does near the wing root, which is meant to guarantee the root stalls before the outboard portion of the wing, which theoretically allow the ailerons to remain effective into the  stall.  Setting those ailerons to have the positive angle sounds like a neat little trick the designers used to simplify the process of producing the wing.  As I would imagine that allows them to build a flat wing instead of one with a twist.