MiG-29's BFM characteristics / doubts

Yea in my opinion the MiG29S in DCS pitches up rapidly and "snaps" back like its was way too light. It just behaves like a leaf. You pitch up do your cobra but immediatly snap back. The plane is a nervous model plane not a 15 tons fighter jet.

 

I posted the real Mig-29 in another thread in december:

 

At minute 2:50 he does that legendary maneuver.

 

 

thanks for your time

Well, the video shows the MiG-29 OVT which has thrust vectoring engines, so it's way more manoeuvrable than the MiG-29 A or S.

Just my two cents...

In your track the plane DYNAMICALLY reaches 57-60 degrees AoA. If the plane has STATIC trim AoA at least 25-26 what behaviour do you hope to see if you pass through 25 degrees AoA with a tons of angulars speed? The thing has a lot of inertia...

Ok, let's take a look from another side: Su-27 has NEUTRAL stability and very similar aerodynamic scheme. The same maneuver is known as "Cobra" and the AoA there is 90+ up to 110-120 degrees.

Mig-29 is slightly positive stable (and neutral or unstable at high AoA).

Hello Yo-Yo,

well as I stated before I am not a pilot, just like flight sims. Well I was expecting a flight behaviour comparable to the Su-27. All these AoA details are nothing for me. If I was a real test pilot the chief engineer would hate me for my feedback ("feels like a leaf WHAT ARE YOU TELLING ME?!") :)

A minute ago I just flew a round in the Mig-29 and... yea, ok... Its not as the Su-27, but its... lets say shes O.K. (keep in mind - I am just that guy in front of PC not a real pilot).

She feels quite nervous, not precise... but ok. I should try some formation flying on the MP server with the F18s

So you got me persuaded to fly the Mig-29 if you repaired the front gear spring. Now that is really an issue , not?

Here we go, my last point of bug report:

Mig29frontgearjump.trk

At this point I want to thank you guys for taking the time and talking to us gamers/simmers.

In real life I wont ever fly again to save the planet. So I thank you guys to give me the chance to fly all these jets without being part of the machinery called tourism that is ruining the planet.

So you got me persuaded to fly the Mig-29 if you repaired the front gear spring. Now that is really an issue , not?

I don't think so.

Just check this for comparison:

or this:

She feels quite nervous, not precise... but ok. I should try some formation flying on the MP server with the F18s

 

So you got me persuaded to fly the Mig-29 if you repaired the front gear spring. Now that is really an issue , not?

Yeah, she is quite a tricky aircraft to handle. Needs either high quality long stick or messing around with the response curve. Lots of practice too but that's obvious.

On the nose gear it's a dead horse I'm still not covinced myself on yet.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=253632

After many landing tips which no one asked for guys say it's realistic. Just never heard it from Yo-Yo.

It's landing tips again. But I can already do it smooooth. I just want to confirm that nose strut strenght on the bounce (and strut durability itself) is correct even at bad landings.

I was pulling my hair out on landing the Mig 29 for some time, then I realised that I was coming down with to high AoA on touch which was slamming the rear against the runway causing the plane to violently pitch forward and bounce all over the place.

Once I got used to nosing more down to what I had been doing, she came down in a fairly civilised manner.

In the air she is a hoot to fly with great power to weight ratio but one has to be easy on the throttle as to avoid chewing through one's fuel load too quickly.

It's landing tips again. But I can already do it smooooth. I just want to confirm that nose strut strenght on the bounce (and strut durability itself) is correct even at bad landings.

Tbh, I think the gear itself needs a look, too. The bouncing may indeed be real, but I've seen (and performed) some that should likely have damaged or destroyed the plane despite not flipping over, etc.

@YoYo

We know how to land properly, most can manage avoiding the bouncing behavior, we're asking if the bouncing itself is correct (not the springy nose, which seems correct based on videos I've seen) but the near indestructible landing gear. Blowing tires or break gear on other planes, including the Frog, is fairly easy, the MiG-29 seems unnaturally durable in comparison.

OP - there's nothing to learn. From main menu: make sure you're logged onto your ED account, then click multiplayer. Done. The server browser will come up with what's available, or you can use the search bar to find a particular server or mission. If you want to do BFM, type "just" in there and you should see the Just Dogfight server come up, then you can select a role from the menu that appears. 1v1, AIR (IR missiles + guns), GROUND (you can load whatever you like at the airfield), or GUNS (the big gunfighting arena over Tbilisi). MP is easy to get into and it beats hell out of the AI, who not only cheat (as pointed out), but are also incredibly predictable. DCS has arguably the worst AI I've seen in a modern flight sim, especially in BFM, and it's one thing that really lets the game down.

As for your concerns - I had similar, because I've developed certain habits from flying other aircraft and in other sims. With time, I learnt to work with what the 29 gives: outstanding acceleration, an excellent sustained turn at higher speeds, and good vertical performance. It has superb nose authority at low speed, but it also loses roll auth and you absolutely must roll with the rudder as you slow down. The G scheduler is a pain to deal with as well, so getting too fast is to be avoided if you intend to begin turning. Your magic number is 685km/h (about 370 knots I think?) down low and if you can hold it at or near that speed, you will eat just about anything for breakfast in a 2-circle. Your most 'balanced' opponent is the Viper, as it has a lot of the same strengths and weaknesses, but the 29 can use its much better TWR, speed, and acceleration against the Hornet as well by trying to force the Hornet into situations where its relative lack of guts leaves it vulnerable... or you can just deny the engagement by scooting away.

I was just doing some refresher flying and noticed that the Mig 29A seemed extraordinarily powerful. It was screaming along even at 50% throttle with weapons loaded.

 

I thought I had just forgotten what it was like to fly

I can't speak for the default 0-curve throttle settings, but running the Warthog AB detent curves I found elsewhere on the forums, I have to have my throttle sitting at or below perhaps 25-40% or the jet tries to run away on me. She has a lot of power. Thankfully the 29 also has some of the best sounds in the game, so I can kind of tune the power by ear as well as by the RPM gauge.

How do you get TAS displayed on the HUD?

BVR modes switch HUD airspeed display to TAS. I think one or two other modes do as well but I don't recall for certain.

The flight models of Mig29 and Su27 compared with F-18, F-16,F15 feels like that the US are far superior, much more easy to fly, in contrast real pilots love the MIG29 for it precise and good behavior ...

anyway, just my unqualified comment on this topic

That's because the MiG-29 doesn't have a fly-by-wire system, and the Su-27's system is much more basic than Western ones (especially in that it lacks any sort of auto-trim function). The Western planes are absolutely easier to fly in that regard but also impose more limits on what you can actually ask the aircraft to do as a pilot - which can be either a good or bad thing, depending on the situation.

The Soviet fighters are also notorious for having extremely heavy control forces, and often a lot of stick movement, compared to the Western fighters where you don't need to think about trim as much and in the case of the F-16, the stick is force-sensing. IIRC the MiG-25 and 31 sticks actually run right up against the instrument panel when trimmed fully nose down, and the MiG-29 as we see it in DCS will run out of nose down trim and still exhibit a strong nose-up tendency when put into full AB.

As a RW pilot I'm quite happy with the MiG-29 FM. This and the F-5 FM I like most due to their general handling and responsiveness.

The FBW aircraft like the F-16 & 18 are really boring if it's about flying, not fighting IMO.

Agreed, though even the F-5 is a bit too 'tame' for me. The 29 is tricky, and after a long time away I come back struggling to land it smoothly, but it's a lot of fun. It's also the only aircraft that seems capable of teaching me to reach and hold a corner speed, oddly enough.

Well I was expecting a flight behaviour comparable to the Su-27.

Well, there's your problem - they are fundamentally different aircraft, by different design bureaux, with different control systems and different (though superficially similar) aerodynamic characteristics. The 29 is much, much lighter as well.

OP - there's nothing to learn. From main menu: make sure you're logged onto your ED account, then click multiplayer. Done. The server browser will come up with what's available, or you can use the search bar to find a particular server or mission. If you want to do BFM, type "just" in there and you should see the Just Dogfight server come up, then you can select a role from the menu that appears. 1v1, AIR (IR missiles + guns), GROUND (you can load whatever you like at the airfield), or GUNS (the big gunfighting arena over Tbilisi). MP is easy to get into and it beats hell out of the AI, who not only cheat (as pointed out), but are also incredibly predictable. DCS has arguably the worst AI I've seen in a modern flight sim, especially in BFM, and it's one thing that really lets the game down.

 

As for your concerns - I had similar, because I've developed certain habits from flying other aircraft and in other sims. With time, I learnt to work with what the 29 gives: outstanding acceleration, an excellent sustained turn at higher speeds, and good vertical performance. It has superb nose authority at low speed, but it also loses roll auth and you absolutely must roll with the rudder as you slow down. The G scheduler is a pain to deal with as well, so getting too fast is to be avoided if you intend to begin turning. Your magic number is 685km/h (about 370 knots I think?) down low and if you can hold it at or near that speed, you will eat just about anything for breakfast in a 2-circle. Your most 'balanced' opponent is the Viper, as it has a lot of the same strengths and weaknesses, but the 29 can use its much better TWR, speed, and acceleration against the Hornet as well by trying to force the Hornet into situations where its relative lack of guts leaves it vulnerable... or you can just deny the engagement by scooting away.

 

...

 

Thank you for your input rossmum!

I understand you, the thing is: from my first flight sim experiences, eventually I assigned the MiG-29A Fulcrum almost legendary dogfight capabilities.

It all started mid 90s; there wasn't the internet availability we have today; all the info one had access really was the one shown at a given flight sim (i.e. TopGun Fire at Will); eventually one also starts reading about it on magazines; etc. and all that contributed to grow that airframe to an almost cult status !

... then you get to DCS and you see that a much heavier airframe - the Su-27 Flanker :

- can pitch its nose around slightly faster / freely ;

- also doesn't try to pull its nose down constantly (to counter excessive AoA by pilot), like the Fulcrum's flight control / AoA limiter ;

- and besides, doesn't seem to bleed speed as easier as the Fulcrum when pulling G's.

Also, in DCS the Fulcrum doesn't seem to me to have much higher pitch rates than the Tomcat or the Eagle.

It seems to have a small turn radius, also a good Sustained Turn Rate... but it doesn't impress me more than a Hornet for instance.

Essentially @Ironhand, @bies and many others already explained why it works that way.

Post #70 of this thread, link below confirmed my first impressions.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=257858&page=7

Yea in my opinion the MiG29S in DCS pitches up rapidly and "snaps" back like its was way too light. It just behaves like a leaf. You pitch up do your cobra but immediatly snap back. The plane is a nervous model plane not a 15 tons fighter jet.

 

I posted the real Mig-29 in another thread in december:

 

At minute 2:50 he does that legendary maneuver.

 

 

thanks for your time

Hello Eber, I am not sure if I am missing something - but isn't that MiG in that video OVT version ? Aka thrust vectoring nozzles ?

Thank you for your input rossmum!

 

I understand you, the thing is: from my first flight sim experiences, eventually I assigned the MiG-29A Fulcrum almost legendary dogfight capabilities.

 

It all started mid 90s; there wasn't the internet availability we have today; all the info one had access really was the one shown at a given flight sim (i.e. TopGun Fire at Will); eventually one also starts reading about it on magazines; etc. and all that contributed to grow that airframe to an almost cult status !

 

... then you get to DCS and you see that a much heavier airframe - the Su-27 Flanker :

- can pitch its nose around slightly faster / freely ;

- also doesn't try to pull its nose down constantly (to counter excessive AoA by pilot), like the Fulcrum's flight control / AoA limiter ;

- and besides, doesn't seem to bleed speed as easier as the Fulcrum when pulling G's.

 

Also, in DCS the Fulcrum doesn't seem to me to have much higher pitch rates than the Tomcat or the Eagle.

It seems to have a small turn radius, also a good Sustained Turn Rate... but it doesn't impress me more than a Hornet for instance.

 

Essentially @Ironhand, @bies and many others already explained why it works that way.

 

Post #70 of this thread, link below confirmed my first impressions.

https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=257858&page=7

Well, the F-16 is made out to be a BFM god in much the same way - but in DCS, it's pretty toothless, because our DCS pilots spent too long filling up in the O-club and can't handle the 9G sustained turns the aircraft is designed for. Likewise, the Hornet has a reputation for having incredible high AoA performance, but unless it's flown very well in DCS it doesn't stand out as much as the hype suggests. There are a bunch of factors to take into account and one of them is that the sim allows things which never happened in real life, or would've seen a pilot lose their wings.

A lot of DCS Hornet pilots make extensive use of the paddle switch in BFM, which would get them a very stern talking to at minimum, and could well see the aircraft written off and cannibalised at worst. The better Flanker pilots will flip the ACS off to haul the nose around with alarming speed (it feels more like fighting an overgrown Mirage sometimes!) and subject the airframe to enormous stress. The F-14 is usually flown well beyond what it was limited to in service, because in DCS every airframe is 0-hour and doesn't need to be preserved for another 40 years of flying.

The 29 is much harder to fly well than anything else mentioned (except maybe the Tomcat, but the F-14 is a much better gun platform in my opinion) but is very dangerous when flown that well. It's taken me a very long time and I'm only just reaching the point where I'm confident to take on other players in F-16s or Hornets with it, and out of all the aircraft we have, the F-16 is the closest Western equivalent in performance and fighting style. Except for maybe the F-15 (when flown very aggressively and mostly due to its enormous ammo reserve, which people seem to use for head-on jousts) there is no one plane that is the best at 'everything', so by the same token, the F-18 is a joke against faster fighters which can simply outpace it or the F-14 which can (by breaking real-life service limits) easily outrate it in a horizontal 2-circle as well as the vertical plane. You have to fight what you're presented, the 29 will (in my experience) happily rate the DCS F-16 when treated right but obviously struggles at the low-speed, high-AoA fights the Hornet or ACS-disabled Flanker dominate.

Incidentally, my few experiences with the Su-27 with its ACS disabled have left me longing for the MiG-29, because I know the latter isn't liable to flip upside down into a near-irrecoverable inverted stall.

I'd definitely agree with a large part of the reputation being due to the shock it gave the West, though. That speed coupled with solid turn performance and HOBS capability was scary at the time.

 

...

 

A lot of DCS Hornet pilots make extensive use of the paddle switch in BFM, which would get them a very stern talking to at minimum, and could well see the aircraft written off and cannibalised at worst. The better Flanker pilots will flip the ACS off to haul the nose around with alarming speed (it feels more like fighting an overgrown Mirage sometimes!) and subject the airframe to enormous stress. The F-14 is usually flown well beyond what it was limited to in service, because in DCS every airframe is 0-hour and doesn't need to be preserved for another 40 years of flying.

 

The 29 is much harder to fly well than anything else mentioned (except maybe the Tomcat, but the F-14 is a much better gun platform in my opinion) but is very dangerous when flown that well. It's taken me a very long time and I'm only just reaching the point where I'm confident to take on other players in F-16s or Hornets with it, and out of all the aircraft we have, the F-16 is the closest Western equivalent in performance and fighting style. Except for maybe the F-15 (when flown very aggressively and mostly due to its enormous ammo reserve, which people seem to use for head-on jousts) there is no one plane that is the best at 'everything', so by the same token, the F-18 is a joke against faster fighters which can simply outpace it or the F-14 which can (by breaking real-life service limits) easily outrate it in a horizontal 2-circle as well as the vertical plane. You have to fight what you're presented, the 29 will (in my experience) happily rate the DCS F-16 when treated right but obviously struggles at the low-speed, high-AoA fights the Hornet or ACS-disabled Flanker dominate.

 

Incidentally, my few experiences with the Su-27 with its ACS disabled have left me longing for the MiG-29, because I know the latter isn't liable to flip upside down into a near-irrecoverable inverted stall.

 

I'd definitely agree with a large part of the reputation being due to the shock it gave the West, though. That speed coupled with solid turn performance and HOBS capability was scary at the time.

Hello,

Yes, in therms of real life employment it's one thing.

But my point was: from a technical comparison point of view of several different airframes, the Fulcrum was the one which got below my expectations when trying to achieve and maintain a 6 o'clock position on a given bandit.

For instance:

- I never was expecting the MiG-29 to pitch its nose with more difficult and restrain (thanks to its the constat pitch down input by the AoA limiter) than an F-15 ;

- neither that it bleed speed easier than the Su-27, this one is easily perceptible when trying to maintain at a JF-17's six, during an high G turn.

Below, explains why the MiG-29 bleeds speed somewhat easier than the Su-27 :

MiG-29 is a stable design, it's elevators acts opposite to wings decreasing it's overall lift, this increases AoA in turn (plane needs higher AoA for given G, thus bigger drag) and cause MiG to lose it's speed in turn faster than modern unstable designs like F-16 or Su-27.

 

MiG-29 designers considered unstable design but the plane would have to be fly by computer FBW, this was very modern not proven concept which would increase the price and complication. They have chosen classic direct steering with was simpler but reduced maneuverability especially sustained turn rate.

Below, the Instantaneuos Turn Rate differences between the Su-27 and the MiG-29 (in bold), also confirm my perception that the Su-27 can sling its nose around a little bit faster (pitch rate) whitout using "S" key, only the paddle switch :

I suppose I should have flown the two-circle fights you wanted against the JF-17 but that would only verify what I already knew (more or less). The JF-17 can rate it's nose faster than the MiG-29 in the sim. Also the Su-27 can rate it's nose faster than the MiG-29. So you should have an easier time in a two-circle fight (rate fight) in the Su-27 than the MiG-29.

 

That being as it may, I took your sample missions, deleted the adversary, and flew circles instead using your MiG-29A and Su-27. I left the rest of the mission as it was. So your altitudes, fuel states, etc were used. Here are the numbers I got:

 

Su-27:

Sustained:

• Turn Rate: 18°/sec @ 7.5 Gs
  
• Turn Radius: 750 m
  

Instantaneous:

• Turn Rate: 29°/sec @ 10 Gs (Yes, I severely over-G'd the airframe)
  
• Turn Radius: 375 m
  

 

MiG-29A:

Sustained:

• Turn Rate: 18.5°/sec @ 6.75 Gs
  
• Turn Radius: 550 m
  

Instantaneous:

• Turn Rate: 25°/sec @ 9.5 Gs
  
• Turn Radius: 375 m
  

 

So, if I were in the MiG-29 and was fighting an Su-27, I'd make it a one circle fight where I can use my sustained turn radius to my advantage. None of this adress the JF-17 but I might find time to take that up at another time after I learn how to get more out of it.

to me it seems like alot of the planes in DCS loose energy / smash very very quickly... MiG-29 included because a F-5E flown by AI bested me when I didn't have any smash from maneuvering against him

to me it seems like alot of the planes in DCS loose energy / smash very very quickly... MiG-29 included because a F-5E flown by AI bested me when I didn't have any smash from maneuvering against him

Mind AI is using simplified flight modeling so it's not to compare to flyable aircraft.

yeah, well if that wasn't the case I wouldn't have been dog-fighting against him for 10 or so minutes only to get low on fuel and have him finally gun me down... Yes I was out of R-73s I used them successfully on his buddies with great effect. Unfortunately my R-77s were no good either on him because I was too close for missiles and had to switch to guns. Also my AI wingmen were killed.

Seemed to me like the MiG I was flying in was just wallowing around from being too slow, I thought this thing is supposed to be the contemporary to a F-18 Hornet in the AOA department?

yeah, well if that wasn't the case I wouldn't have been dog-fighting against him for 10 or so minutes only to get low on fuel and have him finally gun me down... Yes I was out of R-73s I used them successfully on his buddies with great effect. Unfortunately my R-77s were no good either on him because I was too close for missiles and had to switch to guns. Also my AI wingmen were killed.

 

Seemed to me like the MiG I was flying in was just wallowing around from being too slow, I thought this thing is supposed to be the contemporary to a F-18 Hornet in the AOA department?

Did you read the thread? I'm sure you'd find the answers.

Your feelings from a fight with AI are really far away from hard data needed to point out any flight model fault.

sorry I didn't bother to read 12 pages of this thread, but I have noticed when i'm not max performing the plane to 7 Gs and only pulling say 4 to 5 and have a pretty basic R-77 and R-73 loadout it does seem to me that the plane is bleeding way too much energy in a fight and your no good in a fight as a wallowing target and i'm very surprised because I was always led to believe that the MiG-29 was the counterpart to the Hornet because of its love of AOA in a fight

You have the best thrust to weight ratio in game to make that happen. Speed bleed is unavoidable at high alpha, with a positively stable design you have a lot of trim drag from the rear horizontal stabilizer deflecting up to maintain that AOA, one of the benefits of a nuetral or unstable configuration like Su-27.

Just make sure you’re in afterburner, flaps raised and landing gear raised with air brake in and it’ll be rocket:) I would mention your best turning speeds but it’s been a long time for me. If you go fast enough you don’t have to pull full alpha basically, I keep thinking 500-600kmh.....

sorry I didn't bother to read 12 pages of this thread, but I have noticed when i'm not max performing the plane to 7 Gs and only pulling say 4 to 5 and have a pretty basic R-77 and R-73 loadout it does seem to me that the plane is bleeding way too much energy in a fight and your no good in a fight as a wallowing target and i'm very surprised because I was always led to believe that the MiG-29 was the counterpart to the Hornet because of its love of AOA in a fight

Yep, you really should have read the thread from the start, like @draconus recommended.

Because pratically everything about this stuf, has been talked about from the start.

Baz, we know you haven't bothered to read =)

Well, after some months without touching the MiG-29, I've been flying it againg since yesterday.

Again, in the exactly same conditions (saved mission), against the AI's JF-17 as stated here before.

And I got better (getting on the AI's JF-17 six o-clock easily), guess how ?

Basically by flying the MiG-29 like an F-16; which is trying to keep an energy fight and not an angles fight.

Which, for the MiG is to keep a sustained turn rate, of roughly 700 kph speed, before closing the remaining angles for the shot.

And obviously like several of you already mentioned here and for the known reasons, it can bleed speed somewhat faster than the Su-27 when pulling G's / AOA.

And I got better (getting on the AI's JF-17 six o-clock easily), guess how ?

Basically by flying the MiG-29 like an F-16; which is trying to keep an energy fight and not an angles fight.

What makes me sometimes wonder is that some people forget that high AoA capabilities doesn't' mean that you can't fly by energy instead rate fight. It is just that you have capabilities to go for rates instead energy if so wanted.