MiG-29 AFM & trimming

LOL, and that is what 3 hours of sleep per night, 3 nights in a row gets you:doh:

 

I kept reading that 9 in the 229 as a 0. :doh:

Copy that! :megalol:

 

If i'm not mistaken, the version we have in DCS is the 229 powered one?

I don't know which engine is modelled in DCS, but if Sweep is right and its the -220 then the F-15 certainly doesn't have more powerful engines than the Su-27.

Power in AFB:

Lyulka AL-31F: 12,500 kgf ~ 27,558 lbf

F100-PW-220: 23,770 lbf ~ 10,782 kgf

..and for comparison:

F100-PW-229: 29,160 lbf ~ 13,227 kgf

We have -220s in the sim.

 

Officially there aren't any -229 equipped US F-15Cs unless they're hiding something (which I doubt).

Well I don't know much about the F-15 - I realise that the -229 is associated with the F-15E, but I thought that some -Cs got it too at some point.

Well I don't know much about the F-15 - I realise that the -229 is associated with the F-15E, but I thought that some -Cs got it too at some point.

IIRC there's a story by a viper pilot in the original (early 2000's, cant remember the exact year) Falcon 4.0 manual in which he describes a DACT mission against an F-15C. Pretty sure the story specifically mentions that the Eagle in question had the -229's.

IIRC there's a story by a viper pilot in the original (early 2000's, cant remember the exact year) Falcon 4.0 manual in which he describes a DACT mission against an F-15C. Pretty sure the story specifically mentions that the Eagle in question had the -229's.

Yeah I also seen the -229 mentioned in connection with the F-15C, but must admit I didn't pay much attention(was never really "into" the F-15), so I guess I could have confused a theoretical prospect for an operational capability ...:hmm:

I don't know which engine is modelled in DCS, but if Sweep is right and its the -220 then the F-15 certainly doesn't have more powerful engines than the Su-27.

 

Power in AFB:

 

Lyulka AL-31F: 12,500 kgf ~ 27,558 lbf

 

F100-PW-220: 23,770 lbf ~ 10,782 kgf

 

..and for comparison:

 

F100-PW-229: 29,160 lbf ~ 13,227 kgf

Dynamic thrust and aircraft drag paint a different picture, usually. For example: Consider how much drag (and weight...) the Strike Eagle typically has vs the F-15C. Or for the thread's supposed topic...Ever consider a MiG-29A? I've heard it's a bit of a bullet...

IIRC there's a story by a viper pilot in the original (early 2000's, cant remember the exact year) Falcon 4.0 manual in which he describes a DACT mission against an F-15C. Pretty sure the story specifically mentions that the Eagle in question had the -229's.

That manual should be online for easy verification. I'll look into it.

Dynamic thrust and aircraft drag paint a different picture, usually. For example: Consider how much drag (and weight...) the Strike Eagle typically has vs the F-15C. Or for the thread's supposed topic...Ever consider a MiG-29A? I've heard it's a bit of a bullet...

Of course Sweep :) . I just wondered about the "more powerful engines" bit.

Fair enough. :)

I don't remember year of engine production but Su27 has 14500kN engine installed in third millennium.

- does anyone knows drag coefficients of booth airframes?

I don't remember year of engine production but Su27 has 14500kN engine installed in third millennium.

No it doesn't. All Su-27 and Su-30 versions have the AL-31F engine, which produces 12500 kgf in AFB.

AL-31F:

http://www.umpo.ru/Good27_16_2.aspx

The Su-30MKI and Su-30SM have the AL-31FP - same engine(and power), but with a TVC nozzle.

AL-31FP:

http://www.umpo.ru/Good27_16_140.aspx

There is a new upgraded version known as "product 117" which develops 14500 kgf - a variant of it(AL-41FS1) has been installed in the Su-35S(and I believe also in the PAK-FA).

AL-41FS1:

http://www.umpo.ru/Good27_16_141.aspx

jackmckay,

The links I posted above are from the manufacturer of the engines.

I don't remember year of engine production but Su27 has 14500kN engine installed in third millennium.

 

- does anyone knows drag coefficients of booth airframes?

If you want to experiment with the lift to drag ratios, you'll need more then that. What you want it the lift and drag curves per alpha, and at least several mach ranges as well. But those are very hard to find :(

For western aircraft, NASA is your best source. For Soviet/Russian birds..... i don't know :(

:palec nahoru:

Mig29 is story for itself but let start with Su27 which is obviously artificially crippled to make game more 'balanced' even its direct western counterparts don't suffer from 'advancements' like AFM and are artificially supercharged and free of special physics modelling like artificial drag augmentation, significantly decreased roll rate, undepowered engines, limited turn rate, nonexistent structural G resistance, augmented fatal sensitivity to any kind of missile/bullet hit, augmented missile drag and deterioration of missile's sensors, guidance and range. Just to add that Soviets obtained Sidewinder that was stuck unexploded in tail section of soviet MiG during Korea war but in DCS they never fail and same replicas used to be part of Mig21 arsenal (R13M1) are way under its original version despite being hardcopied. So A380 'heavy' is closest model to the Flanker as we see today in DCS. Even A-A kill ratio on Su25T is better than one on Su27. So why would anyone in the world wanted AFM for mig29 in this example of 'special' treatment?

There's been enough that ED have returned Mig29 in 60' era by limiting MFD datalink feature to HUD repeater only. ED probably rely on western sources of Mig29 documentation obviously missing AWACS support feature that has never been sold to other countries like East Germany or Poland. I don't see the reason why should some planes from FC3 package receive any kind of 'special' flight model except the 'closest to the real' one which would make all planes swim in same sea. This is not the case in DCS because developers are kind of confused what is actually real so they let other outsourced teams make their own 'special' physics that's applicable both on their own airframes and missiles. That means that rules are not the same for everyone so don't be surprised about being disappointed by gradual and subtle stripping of vital components and best features of Su27 as of MiG29 too despite other teams modules already over-the-limit abilities.

 

Guys in ED seems to forget that Flanker is world champion claiming and holding 40+ world records in aeronautical achievement and that MiG29 implements same aeronautical features just limited in scale and range. I used to enjoy booth planes too but just now I'm really dissapointed by DCS in general and lack of it's 'simulation' features. Obviously they think that simulating cockpit look and model and parts animation is enough to call itself Simulator. Ballistics and unified physics behavior model is reserved for some next generations to come. I'm really considering refunding on this deception.