MiG-29 AFM & trimming

Was wondering wether the MiG-29 features the same type of artificially applied positive pitch as generated by the SAS in the Su-27?

Reason I'm asking is this is the main reason I'm not flying the Su-27 anymore, it's just not enjoyable for me, thus I was wondering wether it would be the same with the MiG-29.

Reason I'm asking is this is the main reason I'm not flying the Su-27 anymore, it's just not enjoyable for me, thus I was wondering wether it would be the same with the MiG-29.

You mean Su-27 with a roll rate of an overweight A380 is not enjoyable?! I love the feature when you get into negative Gs and the engines die out - just like 1940 Spitfire did :joystick:

AFAIK the MiG-29's we have in game are not fbw and the airframe itself is stable, so i would think not.

A little read about the airframe can be found here:

https://books.google.dk/books?id=NZhENgENhEQC&pg=SA6-PA3&lpg=SA6-PA3&dq=mig-29+stability&source=bl&ots=8M_Z91GYyF&sig=uG_tXsySRqMjP3r_Nq_w5z5uFSM&hl=da&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKkur72eTSAhXoA5oKHWWtAP8Q6AEIGzAA#v=onepage&q=mig-29%20stability&f=false

Totally agree on the SU-27. It's just hard work all the way through. I mostly fly F-5 these days.

Was wondering wether the MiG-29 features the same type of artificially applied positive pitch as generated by the SAS in the Su-27?

The MiG-29 doesn't have an analogue FBW system that the Su-27 has.

I sure am glad Im not a real fighter pilot or anything, who has to fly that terrible pig of an Su27, or god forbid a Mig21 or something...

/sarcasm

Also the Mig29 in the game doesn't yet feature any kind of AFM.

Apologies for somewhat derailing the thread... What specifically are the issues with the Flanker that people are struggling with? I'm sure we can help to solve them for you :)

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

http://imgur.com/a/LxkcF

Apologies for somewhat derailing the thread... What specifically are the issues with the Flanker that people are struggling with? I'm sure we can help to solve them for you :)

I don't think people are struggling, it is more of a case of what has become an ugly FM, sluggish, wallowing around, terrible rudder inputs not to mention the only ac given the break stabiliser option.

It is no longer enjoyable.

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.

I'm really considering refunding on this deception.

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.

Read the real Su-27 manual and take a look at the flight limits for the Flanker and you are going to be surprised.

This kind of posts always amazed me because the lack of real data support, only based on personal wishes, feelings and wrong spectations.

What damage had caused years of SFM FC3 on many users. Now they cant stand a closer and much more real approach to how.real planes fly and real flight limits.

Some AFM is more AFM than other AFM.

If you get what I mean:)

My heart beat rate skyrocketed at reading "Mig-29 AFM" in the title.

Please be more careful naming your posts. Heart health is not joke.

Regards

I know Rage.

And i agree that is always room for improvements. But most of the complains are only based on unkowledge about real flight limits and characteristics.

If the manual says dont push the rudder more than 2x ADI ball diameter over 650 km/y because you can break the vertical tails DONT DO THAT.

If the manual says dont let the plane exceed 360 km/h on Take off because you are going to blow tires DONT DO THAT.

And so on and so for.

True. But the modules are not flown in isolation. People fly their favourite accepting their flaws. It is more difficult to accept that only your favourite aircrafts flaws are modelled and not others. If you play online this is the issue. In single player it matters less.

Totally agree with you.

But with time i hope every AFM module will have the same flight limits modelled. But one must be the first.

I hope so too but I think it unlikely. Different developers, different abilities, different priorities, different interpretations, different visions etc.

Saying that I am glad the Su27 is the leading edge of flight model development. I'm sure the Mig will be special too.

Lets hope ED could force some commonality between developers.

OK, truth be told I've never actually had a chance to read Su-27 manual nor did I fly it in RL, but....

I simply can't imagine that one of the most advanced fighters:

- gets a fantom side roll when doing negative G maneuver

- goes into unrecoverable negative G dive when damaged, meaning FBW is gone and so is the airplane (wouldn't want to be in that poor guys place if this happens in RL)

- starts wobbling like crazy at low speeds->shouldn't it be one of most maneuverable airplanes out there?

- has exceptionally slow roll rate. Didn't do a real life comparison yet, but I will check out some videos from youtube

- blows a tire at ground speeds above 320km/h on takeoff roll

- has extremely high roll inertia-once the heavy roll starts, not really easy to stop it at all

- steers to one side when nose gear locked on takeoff

List is endless. Now is this an accurate representation of something like real life Su-27, I will happily go back to flying Su-25/T.

Oh I just remembered: once I've stalled it out at around 5km alt and it went belly up, which is fine, but then it keeps dropping like a stone all the way to the ground without even changing the heading or twitching a bit. Felt like I was in a piece of marble or somethin'. So much for the 'professional' flight dynamics.

Let me enlight you if im able to do so.

1.- Maximum Negative G:

-2 at Mach < 0.85

-1 at Mach > 0.85

-0.5 at at Speeds < or = at300 Km/h

So check your G meter while doing Negative G maneuver.

2.- FBW:

The Su-27 is unstable by design and needs the FBW to fly properly. If you damage the airframe to the point the FBW is not working what do you expect? That the Flanker is going to fly like nothing?

3.- Minimun LEVEL FLIGHT speed. Only LEVEL FLIGHT alowed: 200 Km/h

Over 6000 meters, minimun LEVEL FLIGHT SPEED 300 Km/h

4.- Maximum Speed during take off:

320 Km/h before front wheel goes up.

360 Km/h before main wheels going up.

So never exceed 320 Km/h with the front wheel on the ground.

PD: Su-25T is a nice plane to fly also, but remember, it has ALSO flight limits.

I hope so too but I think it unlikely. Different developers, different abilities, different priorities, different interpretations, different visions etc.

 

Saying that I am glad the Su27 is the leading edge of flight model development. I'm sure the Mig will be special too.

How to ruin my excitement in 2 sentences.

Thanx for sharing the info.

I think that Su-27 is dynamically unstable-not unflyable :smilewink:

Low speed flight is like trying to stand on top of a Pilates ball.

Check this video out (08:00 - low level flight):

Oh, and yeah the flaps are up ;) (just the slats sticking out)

Will try to replicate it in DCS and post the results.

i got tired of triming the nose all the time in the su27, im starting to hate the flight on it.

...

 

Will try to replicate it in DCS and post the results.

Looking forward to it.