Jump to content

MiG-29 AFM & trimming


Hummingbird

Recommended Posts

This is what the manual has to say about the handling.

http://imgur.com/a/LxkcF

 

Fantastic! I've been looking for some in depth info on the Fulcrum and this is more than I could have dreamed of.

 

Glancing through the first pages, it looks like she's going to be a challenging beast to tame. I love it already.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, whatever helps against posting such bunch of non-argued nonsense claims again. It shouldn't take much more effort to voice your objections in a more constructive manner.

 

The only thing that made sense IMHO was the concern about a potential lack of a common AFM/missile modeling standards between ED and the third parties.

 

And you justify your complete denial of my claims by your own pure RL experience and many accumulated flight hours on every single airframe implemented in DCS and also many more hours spent on wind tunnel tests and design verification?

 

By claiming that general physics incorporating rigid and unified forms of ballistics, kinetics and fluid dynamics (that should be standard for all modules) as tool for verification of module behavior at basic primitive level being primal feature introduced in software that has 'simulator' in name you found obsolete?

 

That's kind of 'arcade game' level.

 

Mig29 has lost its vital feature and whole purpose of MFD that has become SFD (single function display) playing expensive, green colored HUD repeater that would only be useful in case of malfunction of HUD like its gonna fly in between rain of bullets. I first would scraped off that display as unnecessary weight and left if on tarmac. ED forgets that su27 and mig29 used same electronics components that are part of bigger network jacked to EWRs and AWACS grid. Because some ass in developer team said it has only repeater Fulcrum is now 3gen fighter?

 

Get serious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If you are going to use flight data please use OFFICIAL sources:

 

zA0kiPJ.jpg

 

6Fgn7MR.jpg

 

Y8251RJ.jpg

 

76zZgsE.jpg

 

2qplokM.jpg

 

AjMZ7IE.jpg

 

qqtVypN.jpg

 

Now compare this values with the simulator and then make your own conclusions.

" You must think in russian.."

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´

 

Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Aerial Combat Engagement and Performance Rules Omitting in DCS (A.C.E. P.R.O.):

 

In what way are that (official) charts above implemented in DCS and are they valid for booth planes?

- They are absolutely denied in DCS because of Su27 artificially degraded (augmented drag etc.) and because F15 module is in SF zone (+12G).

 

Can we determine absolute differences in any chart segment in % between each?

- Based on charts above, RL differences are in range of 2-5% in general. In max speed aspect in favor of F15 (supersonic regime), and sustained turn rate and climb in favor of su27 (subsonic regime). Su27 has better T/W ratio too.

 

Is that seen in DSC?

- No. It only complies on Su27 (AFM) but poorly simulated, structurally and performance downgraded.

 

Does it make DCS playable (enjoyable) leaving pilot skills and focus essential in aerial combat?

- No. Uneven and unfair differences between modules makes F15 (M2K) plane does all the job by itself.

 

Will (AFM) model gonna be implemented in Mig29?

- Probably yes. That means Mig29 will suck in future as Su27 too. It has already been unjustifiably left without essential peace of equipment - MFD datalink capability and has fixed IRST (which suddenly becomes sideways movable in HMS mode), given dark smoke trail for easier spotting even RL engine smoking occurs only on RPM change, range excessively shorten..etc.

 

Does DCS have unified physics applicable on all planes evenly?

- No. DCS leaves freedom of choice to the outsourced developers without flight performance and RL chars match comparative verification tests.

 

How many FM DCS has?

- Now we have SFM, AFM an PFM that all represent different physics approaches instead being models of interaction fidelity giving pilot more insight on systems functionality and detail of operation. More FM models to come as new modules keeps coming.

 

How much DCS is 'Simulator' at current stage of development?

- 40% and drooping.


Edited by jackmckay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And you justify your complete denial of my claims by your own pure RL experience and many accumulated flight hours on every single airframe implemented in DCS and also many more hours spent on wind tunnel tests and design verification?

 

All I said is that your post not only doesn't have any arguments, but is riddled with just ridiculous claims and insinuations. Like "Su-27 is artificially crippled by ED", "Su-27 flies like A380", "Russian copies of the earliest US Sidewinders are underperforming" (presumably compared to much improved later US Sidewinders), etc. It's hard to consider the post seriously after reading such stuff.

 

Some of the things added to the Su-27 AFM in DCS are perhaps too unforgiving at the moment, but I presume those will get ironed out in time. Or you're suggesting that all the modules should be kept at the similar level, less realistic but more balanced? They have to start with the improvements from somewhere.

 

Mig29 has lost its vital feature and whole purpose of MFD that has become SFD (single function display) playing expensive, green colored HUD repeater that would only be useful in case of malfunction of HUD like its gonna fly in between rain of bullets. I first would scraped off that display as unnecessary weight and left if on tarmac. ED forgets that su27 and mig29 used same electronics components that are part of bigger network jacked to EWRs and AWACS grid. Because some ass in developer team said it has only repeater Fulcrum is now 3gen fighter? Get serious.

 

And this is the worst claim yet because at least the information on this is readily available, yet you still continue to insist that this screen should be an "MFD" which it never was. It is the same screen as in the Su-27 (even has a switch for the tactical mode), but the similarities stop there as it lacks the rest of the more advanced datalink gear. Why? Because it would be an expensive waste since the MiG-29 cannot exploit that tactical data due to its limited weapons payload and range, hence a simpler datalink was used where a MiG-29 would get assigned to a single target only.

 

Get serious.

 

You might want to try to read the stuff you're posting first.


Edited by Dudikoff
  • Like 1

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Looking forward to it.

 

Well, I just tried it with some 3.000kg of fuel and 2xR-27ER and 2xR73 load out at 600m AGL and I must say it was flying almost like the one from the video clip, so I guess I shot my self in the foot there :music_whistling:

I was expecting it to go haywire, but it performed just like in the video. I even tried the same maneuver of getting out of the low speed regime and it was a-ok.

Cmptohocah=CMPTOHOCAH 😉

Link to comment
Share on other sites

All I said is that your post not only doesn't have any arguments, but is riddled with just ridiculous claims and insinuations.

 

- you have THE privileged arguments by claiming that my arguments are not valid and not explaining one regarding fluid physics. OK lets start with roll rate for a start. Explain why F15 has double roll rate over Su27?

 

Some of the things added to the Su-27 AFM in DCS are perhaps too unforgiving at the moment, but I presume those will get ironed out in time. Or you're suggesting that all the modules should be kept at the similar level, less realistic but more balanced? They have to start with the improvements from somewhere.

 

I'm suggesting that there should be one physics to rule them all. Basic differences are in Cd, Cl, T/W, RCS/deg etc. Game engine itself should make flight dynamics charts (close to) RL valid without individual tweaking that lasts nx2mw.

 

And this is the worst claim yet because at least the information on this is readily available, yet you still continue to insist that this screen should be an "MFD" which it never was. It is the same screen as in the Su-27 (even has a switch for the tactical mode), but the similarities stop there as it lacks the rest of the more advanced datalink gear. Why? Because it would be an expensive waste since the MiG-29 cannot exploit that tactical data due to its limited weapons payload and range, hence a simpler datalink was used where a MiG-29 would get assigned to a single target only.

 

Of course mig29's MFD is just lifesaving peace of equipment used in case if HUD fuse burns out. Soviets have placed extra display instead of extra fuse - how convenient. 'Expensive waste' that gives pilot valid realtime SA? R77 capability and 2 targets tracking is limited weapons payload? Single target? Can't stop laughing.

 

You might want to try to read the stuff you're posting first.

 

How about you reading some manuals, comparison charts and using pure deductive logic? I can send you links on many pdf documentation.

 

That's just a nice and good friendly advice. ;)


Edited by jackmckay
Link to comment
Share on other sites

- you have THE privileged arguments by claiming that my arguments are not valid and not explaining one regarding fluid physics. OK lets start with roll rate for a start. Explain why F15 has double roll rate over Su27?

 

I'm not working for ED so I'm not the one who needs to be convinced. If you have concerns on the current modeling, you can provide test tracks showing the results in game differing from the official data from the flight manuals, operational tests, etc. Just stating how you KNOW something is wrong means absolutely nothing.

 

I'm suggesting that there should be one physics to rule them all. Basic differences are in Cd, Cl, T/W, RCS/deg etc. Game engine itself should make flight dynamics charts (close to) RL valid without individual tweaking that lasts nx2mw.

 

This is wishful thinking. Perhaps X-Plane had or still has something like this, DCSW doesn't AFAIK. So, you can accept the current limitations or ditch DCSW altogether. Yapping about it won't change much.

 

Of course mig29's MFD is just lifesaving peace of equipment used in case if HUD fuse burns out. Soviets have placed extra display instead of extra fuse - how convenient. 'Expensive waste' that gives pilot valid realtime SA? R77 capability and 2 targets tracking is limited weapons payload? Single target? Can't stop laughing.

 

The Su-27 display is the same and has the same switch for the HUD repeater mode so it means there was probably some need for this (e.g. perhaps from the MiG-23 experience which had no backup display).

 

The R-77 was compatible with 9.13S only and barely two dozen of those entered service in RuAF with no R-77 missiles. It also still had the same range limitations. Unless you have some actual proof that this variant (or the ones before) had the tactical mode option on the display, you're only laughing at your stubborn ignorance.

 

How about you reading some manuals, comparison charts and using pure deductive logic? I can send you links on many pdf documentation.

 

Or, even better, just post the relevant scans from those here as, you know, arguments?


Edited by Dudikoff
  • Like 1

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Let's just say that I trust ED's engineers, and flight SMEs over a forum "warrior" and desktop ace "pilot" who posts unsubstantiated claims, without any proof whatsoever, and claims it is truth.

 

Watch some real life incockpit videos of the Su27 in action. Watch some interviews with RL pilots. Watch them speak about how they one and all wear out the thumb on their gloves, from the frequent trim corrections. Our Flanker behaves extremely close to the real thing, just because you can't accept that fact doesn't mean its wrong.

 

I find it the second best flight model in terms of enjoyability and accuracy in the whole of DCS World.

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Trying to enlight you again but is so hard and im so tired repeating myself.

 

The Mig-29 doesnt have a tactical display Mode on the MFD. Period. Why?

 

Because the Mig-29 USES THE HUD AND THE ADI to make GCI controlled interceptions. Is clear enough now?.

 

Some Mig-29 were fitted with the Lazur Datalink System. A GCI-Mig / Mig-29 GCI Datalink that provides guide information directly on the HUD and on the ADI. The pilot only need to follow the guide circle on the HUD and the guiding lines on the ADI transmited by the GCI. Even this System allows the GCI to control the radar remotely.

 

I hope this would help you to understand.

" You must think in russian.."

[sIGPIC][/sIGPIC]

 

Windows 7 Home Premium-Intel 2500K OC 4.6-SSD Samsung EVO 860- MSI GTX 1080 - 16G RAM - 1920x1080 27´

 

Hotas Rhino X-55-MFG Crosswind Rudder Pedals -Track IR 4

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well, I just tried it with some 3.000kg of fuel and 2xR-27ER and 2xR73 load out at 600m AGL and I must say it was flying almost like the one from the video clip, so I guess I shot my self in the foot there :music_whistling:

I was expecting it to go haywire, but it performed just like in the video. I even tried the same maneuver of getting out of the low speed regime and it was a-ok.

:) When I said I was looking forward to seeing it, knew that was what you would find. Had a chance to fly a bit this AM. Did it without weapons, though, as it would be done at an air show. I probably should have cut out the lengthy flight back down to the other end of the runway for the third (last) pass.

 

  • Like 1

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg

 

_____

Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 32GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, that video is obviously fake Ironahand. Fess up! Admit it! :megalol:

 

/s

 

Seriously, though maybe we should stick to the topic at hand. Which oddly enough is Mig29 AFM (which AFAIK does not exist at this point) & trimming. :)


Edited by OnlyforDCS

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

...

Seriously, though maybe we should stick to the topic at hand. Which oddly enough is Mig29 AFM (which AFAIK does not exist at this point) & trimming. :)

Guilty. Lost track of the thread's topic. Need to be more careful.

YouTube Channel: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCU1...CR6IZ7crfdZxDg

 

_____

Win 10 Pro x64, ASUS Z97 Pro MoBo, Intel i7-4790K, EVGA GTX 970 4GB, HyperX Savage 32GB, Samsung 850 EVO 250 GB SSD, 2x Seagate Hybrid Drive 2TB Raid 0.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To be fair, there's not much to be added to the original topic as there's no MiG-29 AFM released yet.

i386DX40@42 MHz w/i387 CP, 4 MB RAM (8*512 kB), Trident 8900C 1 MB w/16-bit RAMDAC ISA, Quantum 340 MB UDMA33, SB 16, DOS 6.22 w/QEMM + Win3.11CE, Quickshot 1btn 2axis, Numpad as hat. 2 FPH on a good day, 1 FPH avg.

 

DISCLAIMER: My posts are still absolutely useless. Just finding excuses not to learn the F-14 (HB's Swansong?).

 

Annoyed by my posts? Please consider donating. Once the target sum is reached, I'll be off to somewhere nice I promise not to post from. I'd buy that for a dollar!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought the complaint about them being smokey was funny. Nearly every video of MiG-29s especially (and Russian jets in general at low altitude anyway) they tend to smoke like chimneys. Just like Russia to have coal burning steam planes while everybody else moved to diesel.

Де вороги, знайдуться козаки їх перемогти.

5800x3d * 3090 * 64gb * Reverb G2

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I've read, conventional trim changes with airspeed are small. Great, right?

 

The problem is that there are lots of little things that change pitch trim as you fly. Thrust application pushes the nose up, as does speedbrake extension, and maneuver flaps cause noticeable transients. The elevator is geared depending on airspeed to give more precise control at high speed, which makes it possible to run out of forward stick when accelerating through Mach 1.

 

Other general information:

 

The aircraft is equipped with a 3 axis stabilization system, a slightly more advanced version of the pitch/yaw dampers in the F-5. No fly by wire here. The max allowed AoA is 26 degrees, and there is a stick pusher to prevent the pilot from exceeding this (it can be overridden but I'm not exactly sure how). Precise AoA/G control is difficult at/below corner speeds. If decelerating through Mach 1 while in a hard turn, there is a large tendency to "dig in" and over stress the airframe if care isn't taken to reduce back pressure. At high AoA, ailerons are ineffective and heavy rudder coordination is recommended (even though the stab aug supposedly moves the rudders automatically? Clarification needed). Max roll rate can be as low as 40°/s at high speed and low altitude, which is really, really bad (the F-15 is a few hundred degrees per second in the same conditions, thanks to a much more powerful hydraulic system). Also, roll response is generally delayed/slightly sluggish but "with little tendency to overshoot."

 

TL;DR: Nothing is going to stop you from pulling the wings off. Sorry.

 

So it sounds like the Fulcrum will be no easier to fly than the Flanker. I'm looking forward to it for sure.

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pull harder on the stick :)

 

Yeah, I think the manual mentioned 17 kg maximum force for the stick pusher.

 

What I was referring to is how exactly you'd implement it in the sim (ie if there's a button or lever to disable it like in the Flanker). Maybe they could have a generic "stick pusher override" button that simulates the pilot pulling with both hands?

DCS modules are built up to a spec, not down to a schedule.

 

In order to utilize a system to your advantage, you must know how it works.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yeah, I think the manual mentioned 17 kg maximum force for the stick pusher.

 

What I was referring to is how exactly you'd implement it in the sim (ie if there's a button or lever to disable it like in the Flanker). Maybe they could have a generic "stick pusher override" button that simulates the pilot pulling with both hands?

 

Yeah like having to hold down a key while pulling the stick to maximum deflection or something like that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

So it sounds like the Fulcrum will be no easier to fly than the Flanker. I'm looking forward to it for sure.

 

Yeah, me too. The Mig29 has always had a special place in my heart. I'm proud to say that I've not flown the SFM FC3 module even once. I'm waiting for the AFM/PFM. Im sure the forums will erupt like crazy when the new FM hits, just like they did with the Su27 PFM.

Current specs: Windows 10 Home 64bit, i5-9600K @ 3.7 Ghz, 32GB DDR4 RAM, 1TB Samsung EVO 860 M.2 SSD, GAINWARD RTX2060 6GB, Oculus Rift S, MS FFB2 Sidewinder + Warthog Throttle Quadrant, Saitek Pro rudder pedals.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

- They are absolutely denied in DCS because of Su27 artificially degraded (augmented drag etc.) and because F15 module is in SF zone (+12G).

 

 

Um.....does L/D = n* T/W mean anything to you? :huh:

Modules: FC3, Mirage 2000C, Harrier AV-8B NA, F-5, AJS-37 Viggen, F-14B, F-14A, Combined Arms, F/A-18C, F-16C, MiG-19P, F-86, MiG-15, FW-190A, Spitfire Mk IX, UH-1 Huey, Su-25, P-51PD, Caucasus map, Nevada map, Persian Gulf map, Marianas map, Syria Map, Super Carrier, Sinai map, Mosquito, P-51, AH-64 Apache

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...