MiG-29 G load

[AeriaGloria]

Hello, it seems to be that MiG-29 can not reach the stated instantaneous G load, and it is low enough that it also can’t reach the full envelope of the sustained turn rate numbers. 
 

Here is a track with 2x APU-470, and 2x R-60, and 50-55% fuel in order to reach 13,000 kg gross weight, which seems to be the most common testing metric other then the same with 2x R-73. 
 

in addition there is a max G load graph we see in both books and manuals that goes from below 300 kmh to 900 kmh, showing over 20 deg/s at 900 kmh “with missiles.” And there is a sentence in the “practical aerodynamics” manual that states:

“For example, the maximum speed of turn in a steady position of the aircraft without weapon mounts at an altitude of 1,000m, Mach Number 0.8, with 50% of remaining fuel (aircraft weight 13,000 kg) is 19.5-20° a second.”

Partway through the track I also jettison the R-60 to show a “without missile load” configuration. 
 

Images are from Yefim Gordon or GAF TO-1 from Amazon. According to instantaneous turn chart, we should approximately have little issue hitting 9 G at lower altitudes from around Mach 0.55-0.85, or around 700-1000 kmh at lower altitudes. And above this speed the transonic zone is reducing elevator authority until around Mach 1.05-1.1 (according to practical aerodynamics.) Instead, we are limited to basically 8 G from below 900 kmh, which should be our maximum rate 9 G speed. 

 

MiG29gload.trk

Edited Sunday at 05:29 AM by AeriaGloria

[Lixma 06]

Sustained turn rates I'm seeing @ 1000m, 20°C

13000kg fuel, no pylons - 20°sec @900kp/h

13000kg fuel, 2 x R-73 - 19°sec @900kp/h

13000kg fuel, 2 x R-27R, 4 x R-73, Ext. Fuel - 16°sec @ 900kp/h

 

[AeriaGloria]

This is also about instantaneous turn. It should have no issue hitting 9 G at low alt from Mach 0.55-85. Mach 0.65-0.85 at 3 km. 
 

In addition the instantaneous chart and the two sustained turn charts show that it can reach 9 G at 900 kmh (20 deg/s) with atleast up to 2x Archer loaded. Doing that sustained, the instantaneous chart shows it should have some pull in reserve (not needing full back stick as it does now)

Edited Sunday at 07:43 PM by AeriaGloria

[sylkhan]

This confirms my tests.
I have done numerous online tests (dogfighters servers), and it turns out that the Mig-29 is the worst dogfighter.
At speeds < 800/850 km, the Mig-29 turns really badly, and performance is poor, with a lot of drag.
The F-18, F-16, F-15, and M2k, JF-17 all outperform the Mig-29, even the F-14 turns better at low/medium speeds, lol.
I win all the time vs Mig-29, i Lost all the time vs other fighters.
Is the real Mig-29 really that bad?

Edited 18 hours ago by sylkhan

[AeriaGloria]

35 minutes ago, sylkhan said:

This confirms my tests.
I have done numerous online tests (dogfighters servers), and it turns out that the Mig-29 is the worst dogfighter.
At speeds < 800/850 km, the Mig-29 turns really badly, and performance is poor, with a lot of drag.
The F-18, F-16, F-15, and M2k, JF-17 all outperform the Mig-29, even the F-14 turns better at low/medium speeds, lol.
I win all the time vs Mig-29, i Lost all the time vs other fighters.
Is the real Mig-29 really that bad?

As we see from the charts I attached, sustained and instantaneous, it shouldn’t be