announced DCS MiG-29A

I think most of Mig 29s bad rep is that it was used by the opposing force or axis force ( whatever we call them these days). The thing is...their opponents have always had intel advantage like AWACS. The Mig 29 users never had AWACS advantage or C4ISTAR assets much.

 

 

 

The wars before...even allies had so much casualties and losses. Today, technology on intel gap is intense.

 

 

 

 

The allies have yet to face Migs aided by AWACS at the very least...

Truth. Having AWACS on your side is always good thing, because it can guide fighter into advantageous position, while enemies had to sometimes rely only on their own eyes. There is interesting documentary about Serbian MiGs, that tells the whole story from another side:

https://migflug.com/jetflights/german-luftwaffe-mig-29-fulcrum/

 

 

https://www.16va.be/mig-29_experience.htm

Thank you for proving my point.

Truth. Having AWACS on your side is always good thing, because it can guide fighter into advantageous position, while enemies had to sometimes rely only on their own eyes. There is interesting documentary about Serbian MiGs, that tells the whole story from another side:

 

They never stood a chance against opponents having AWACS and other C4ISTAR assets and network tech advantage. So there are somethings...even skill won't do much. The Serbs had only Ground radar to depend on and via radio reports...

Much of the F-15 exemplary record is all thanks to having AWACS helping them.

Honestly I been flying the MiG-29 on Blue Flag PG and didn't find it lacking in any sense. I can pick my fights and disengage at will and nothing can keep up with me... Amraams are good, but once R-27 and R-77 get updated their advantage margin will drop. Link 16 is nice, but good pilots shouldn't relay on Data link... on Blue Flag Caus '80ies I feel I can win any fight or just runaway from any disadvantage fight, what I can't say for Hornet or Viper... only Eagle can keep up, but again in a merge again I have clear advantage.

biggest mistake from ED was to put in game versions of NATO planes that are from the 21st century and AIM-120B/C, not to mention AIM-9X. They killed the PvP and historical aspect of the sim, we're stuck with russian equipment from the 80s

Honestly I been flying the MiG-29 on Blue Flag PG and didn't find it lacking in any sense. I can pick my fights and disengage at will and nothing can keep up with me... Amraams are good, but once R-27 and R-77 get updated their advantage margin will drop. Link 16 is nice, but good pilots shouldn't relay on Data link... on Blue Flag Caus '80ies I feel I can win any fight or just runaway from any disadvantage fight, what I can't say for Hornet or Viper... only Eagle can keep up, but again in a merge again I have clear advantage.

Exactly, in a FOX 1 environment it is a different story and i can hear blue pilots crying :lol:

Exactly, in a FOX 1 environment it is a different story and i can hear blue pilots crying :lol:

They won't

Because they won't fly in 1980s servers:)

Honestly I been flying the MiG-29 on Blue Flag PG and didn't find it lacking in any sense. I can pick my fights and disengage at will and nothing can keep up with me... Amraams are good, but once R-27 and R-77 get updated their advantage margin will drop. Link 16 is nice, but good pilots shouldn't relay on Data link... on Blue Flag Caus '80ies I feel I can win any fight or just runaway from any disadvantage fight, what I can't say for Hornet or Viper... only Eagle can keep up, but again in a merge again I have clear advantage.

Exactly, in a FOX 1 environment it is a different story and i can hear blue pilots crying :lol:

Chizh said on Russian forum "not to expect much improvement" regarding performance of Russian missiles after rework as he believes they are already quite accurately modeled. And R-77 is unavailable for MiG-29A anyways, it's not S model.

Also, the Blue side has F-14 with Phoenix missiles working just like AMRAAM but twice ranged. I don't do much MP, but even in SP it's a challenging opponent especially since it seems way too accurate.

They won't

Because they won't fly in 1980s servers:)

hahaha so true :megalol:

Might be a silly question but, who is working on the 29A?

Might be a silly question but, who is working on the 29A?

Noone yet. But ed is thinking about making 29

Oh, it’s a long way down the road then.

Noone yet. But ed is thinking about making 29

I think we can expect the development to start around 2023. I mean there is no confirmation on if they are going to do it. They got plans...but thats just it for now.

Its a pity we can only have Redforce jets of late 80s around. They are certainly no match against the Blueforce unless we manage to merge.

biggest mistake from ED was to put in game versions of NATO planes that are from the 21st century and AIM-120B/C, not to mention AIM-9X. They killed the PvP and historical aspect of the sim, we're stuck with russian equipment from the 80s

I agree with that one. Though I think a good way to solve the problem is to have some older NATO planes. Though I hope the MiG-29A means we're seeing an end to DCS :Flaming cliffs. As long as we have LOMAC and especially if the two share assets and can even do on line play I'll be happy about that. In my view it should be up to the person setting up a server to decide if they want to allow LOMAC or not.

biggest mistake from ED was to put in game versions of NATO planes that are from the 21st century and AIM-120B/C, not to mention AIM-9X. They killed the PvP and historical aspect of the sim, we're stuck with russian equipment from the 80s

I prefer the more modern fighters. It should be up to mission designer to simply limit armament. Want 80s or early 90s scenarios ? you can reduce AC capabilities and close enough emulate by not using link 16 and removingthe likes of aim9x and Amraams as armament options.

I prefer the more modern fighters. It should be up to mission designer to simply limit armament. Want 80s or early 90s scenarios, you can reduce ac capabilities and close enough emulate by not using link 16 and removing aim9x and Amraams as armament options

Yep, you can limit the armament but if you set the mission from 1992 onwards, red team cannot be competitive as the MiG-29S and R-77 were not bought in quantities (less than 30 MiG-29S in 1991). MiG-29M development was cancelled. R-77 was not deployed. There is a huge gap from 1992 to 2008 (aprox).

In game we dont have proper AI Fighter units from 1992 onwards (No MiG-29SMT, No Su-27SM or Su-30SM). We have a Su-30 (very early version I guess) and Su-33 from 1995. Thats it. :megalol:

Yeap, we have at least the Su-34 as AI unit! :joystick:

Please, not this again. Just yesterday I had similar conversation on how "crappy" 29A is going to be, because some "clever"article on internet said so. Want better information about this topic, here you have it: https://ru.scribd.com/document/60545155/MiG-29-Midland

EW is very simplified in DCS, and it will stay like it for very loooooooooong time. Radar technology is simplified as well, even on FF modules. So no problem here. As for combat use, you clearly dont know all the facts. Main reason why 29s did not do well was mainly because of bad strategy, lack of proper training and poor maintenance. Even some generals said that if both sides switched armament, the results would be same.

Really? A totally not biased and factual book? Really Soviet Ace? :lol:

Yep, you can limit the armament but if you set the mission from 1992 onwards, red team cannot be competitive as the MiG-29S and R-77 were not bought in quantities (less than 30 MiG-29S in 1991). MiG-29M development was cancelled. R-77 was not deployed. There is a huge gap from 1992 to 2008 (aprox).

 

 

 

In game we dont have proper AI Fighter units from 1992 onwards (No MiG-29SMT, No Su-27SM or Su-30SM). We have a Su-30 (very early version I guess) and Su-33 from 1995. Thats it. :megalol:

 

 

Yeap, we have at least the Su-34 as AI unit! :joystick:

I think its irrelevant how many were exactly produced when it comes to mission creation. I mean there were only 10 F/A18C lot 20's produced and perhaps taking this line of thinking to an even more extreme level perhaps servers should only allow 1 F/A18C lot 20 at any given time because the BUNO # specifically is 165407, a particular individual air frame? I think not.

Really? A totally not biased and factual book? Really Soviet Ace? :lol:

What you provided wasn't biased, but it only showed that MiG-29 with R-27R (Not ERs) is worse than F-18 with Aim-120. What a surprise! Now make that hornet fly with aim-7 and you'll see that there's little to none difference between these planes in terms of bvr

What you provided wasn't biased, but it only showed that MiG-29 with R-27R (Not ERs) is worse than F-18 with Aim-120. What a surprise! Now make that hornet fly with aim-7 and you'll see that there's little to none difference between these planes in terms of bvr

radar itself still matters for BVR. APG73 > APG65 > N019. Not to mention MIg29A lacks ECM

radar itself still matters for BVR. APG73 > APG65 > N019. Not to mention MIg29A lacks ECM

N019 had better detection range compared to apg65 as far as i know.

And yes, 9.12 lacked jammer, but 9.13 had one.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but Apg73 entered service after the collapse of the SU, so why even mention it?

N019 had better detection range compared to apg65 as far as i know.

And yes, 9.12 lacked jammer, but 9.13 had one.

Correct me if i'm wrong, but Apg73 entered service after the collapse of the SU, so why even mention it?

Because thats the radar our in game hornet has. Thats something a mission designer can't change. Considering that the N019 is basically just a further evolution of the Saphir's 23 series radar yea..... no. it is not superior compared to a next generation fully digital mech plannar array radar with PSP. This exactly why even before the collapse of the USSR started to develop N011 "bars" radar as sucessor to the N001 in the Su27 and the Zhuk radars to succeed the N019's in the Mig's.

Also ED isn't considering a possibility of the 9.13 but the 9.12 as a module.

Though I certainly wouldn't be against this

I feel as though the Su-27SK would be a nicer choice because it would better satisfy those which want something that would potentially fare better vs modern noughties teen series fighters, provided the missiles get reworked and the avionics do too (such as intra flight data link)

It would also allow for at least a depiction of reserve elements of a near peer adversaries air power

Given the manual was unclassified in 2004 it begs to question why even this version isn't considered as a FF module

N019 had better detection range compared to apg65 as far as i know.

And yes, 9.12 lacked jammer, but 9.13 had one.

When it comes to the jammer on 9.13 it was Gardeniya...

According to Oleg Samolovich from Sukhoi's memoirs, the Su-17 team lead by Zyrin refused to redesign a version with internal Gardeniya jammer (post Beka'a Valley) on the grounds it was crap and a waste of space and mass.

IRL it was not being used on MiG-29, planes had just increased fuel tank.

When it comes to radar N019 had worse parameters in independent mode (without GCI steering the radar) than APG-65, it was difficult to operate and it had many limitations. The way how the radar was meant to be used could be quite new for CF3 or full fidelity western avionics jets with independent operation capabilities.

"N019 radar on bench

Based on the work undertaken by NPO Istok on the experimental Soyuz radar program, Phazotron NIIR were tasked in the mid 70s with producing a modern radar for the MiG-29. Originally intended to have a planar array antenna and digital signal processing, and a range of at least 100km against a fighter target, it soon became clear that this would not be achievable, at least not in a radar that would fit in the MiG-29's nose.

N019EA radar mounted on export MiG-29

Phazotron NIIR reverted to a version of the twist cassegrain antenna used successfully on the Sapfir-23ML, and analogue signal processor technologies similar to their earlier designs, with a NII Argon- designed Ts100 digital computer.

N019 block diagram

The N019 radar weighs around 385kg in total. It is a pulse-doppler radar operating in X band around 3cm wavelength. It uses three basic operating regimes. High PRF radar mode for optimal detection of closing targets, medium PRF mode for optimal detection of receding targets, and an interleaved high/medium PRF mode for all aspect detection. It uses a guard channel for sidelobe suppression. SARH Illumination and main channels use different frequencies within the X band, and are multiplexed in time. Individual aircraft can be preset on the ground to different frequencies to avoid mutual interference during group operations.

N019 Master oscillator

Scanning cycle times are 2.5-5 seconds depending on mode.

Beam width is 3.5º, which determines the minimum separation of two targets in azimuth.

The radar beam is stabilised up to 120º in roll and +40º/-30º in pitch.

N019 Transmitter

N019 is a hybrid analogue/digital design, with an NII Argon Ts100 digital processing unit. The Ts100 processor can achieve 170,000 operations per second, has 8K RAM and 136k ROM, and is built using medium scale integration ICs.

N019 Ts100 processor

It is based on the proprietary POISK architecture developed at NII Argon, which allows adapting of the instruction set to control system functions, by expanding the basic instruction set with microcodes inherent in specific tasks. Compared to machines using the same elements but a generic instruction set (e.g. the ES EVM architecture Argon-15A of the MiG-31) processing capability was enhanced by 1.5 to 2.5 times and the code 3 to 5 times more compact, making Ts100 much cheaper to produce. The Ts100 computer weighs 32 kg.

N019 Microwave receiver

Radar Modes (Description from N-019EB export variant manual)

Radar scan limits in azimuth: ±65º

Radar scan limits in elevation: +56º, -36º

Mode "V" (Vstryehchya) : Encounter

Encounter mode is the main search mode used in interception, as it gives the longest detection ranges and the least false returns.

It uses a High PRF mode which can detect closing targets only in the velocity range of 230 - 2500km/h at altitudes from 30m to 23,000m. The display is calibrated to a maximum range of 150km.

Target can be up to 10,000m above or 6,000m below the host aircraft's own altitude.

A typical 3 sq m RCS fighter target can be detected at 50-70 km and tracked at 40-60 km. If the target is flying below 3,000m reduces the detection range to 40-70 km and tracking range to 30-60km.

Two basic scan patterns are used.

When the system is under direct GCI control via datalink, a 6 bar elevation raster scan is used. This scan covers a sector of 40° in azimuth at ranges up to 30km, 30° at ranges of 30-55 km, and 20° above 55km within the scan limits given above. The distance to target and other useful information is supplied by GCI command, and the direction of the scan is automatically cued by CGI command towards the desired target.

When the system is not under direct GCI control via datalink, a 4 bar raster scan mode is used to acquire a target manually. This mode scans a constant 50° in azimuth, with the pilot controlling the direction of the scan. It is expected that the rough direction to the target will be given by ground control via voice commands.

There is no scan pattern for full azimuth range scanning. The 130º scan area is divided into 3 sectors. Left sector is -65º to -15º, centre sector covers -25º to +25º, right sector from +15º to +65º, giving overlapping coverage of the full 130º scan limits. Individual targets can be resolved providing they are separated in azimuth and 5-6km in range. Range measuring error of a single target can be as high as 8km, which should be recalled when comparing measured target range with that supplied by GCI controller.

Minimum measurable range in this mode is 5km.

Lockon and transition to tracking mode takes 2 to 7 seconds in Encounter mode.

Note that in Encounter mode, a target that changes direction to a tail-on engagement may be be lost even when in tracking mode, if it is no longer closing.

Mode "D" (Dogon): Pursuit

A medium PRF mode usable for both headon and tailchase engagements. In practise it is used only when necessary, as it is prone to displaying false targets from ground clutter especially at low altitudes. Marsh land, marshy forests and flood plains give greatest clutter problems. When multiple false returns are present, the pilot should compare visible targets with the calculated target range supplied by datalink from GCI controller to determine the correct target.

Display is calibrated to a maximum range of 50km.

Detects targets from 30 m to 23,000 m altitude receding at speeds of 210 - 2200 km/h.

Target can be up to 10,000m above or 6,000m below.

Range against a typical 3 sq m RCS fighter target is 25-35km search and 20-35km tracking when host aircraft is flying above 3000m. When flying from 1000m to 3000m altitude, range is reduced to 20-35km search and 18-35km track. When flying at 500-1000m achievable range is just 15-30km search and 13-25km tracking.

When target range is below 20km, scan coverage is 40º in azimuth, 16.5º in elevation.

If target range is above 20km, scan coverage is 30º in azimuth, 13.5º in elevation.

Individual targets can be resolved providing they are separated 3-4km in range in Pursuit mode.

Errors in range measurement can be as high as 8km, but there is no minimum range.

Lockon and transition to tracking mode takes 1-4 seconds in Pursuit mode.

When "Cooperation" mode is selected, the radar is automatically switched to an equivalent mode to pursuit, scanning with the IRST.

Mode "SP" (Svobodnoye Prostranstvo) Free Search

According to Russian pilots this mode was only found on early production Russian MiG-29s. It was a search mode, and was removed on later production batches. It was not present on any export MiG-29s. The name suggests it might have been a non-lookdown mode, but this is speculation.

Mode "AVT" (Aootomaht) Automatic

Automatic mode uses a mixture of High and Medium PRF to give optimal all aspect detection. Each line of the scan is alternated between high and medium PRF, unless range is under 10km when only medium PRF is used.

It generates a display calibrated to a maximum range of 100km. Targets can be theoretically detected at similar ranges to Encounter and Pursuit modes according to targets direction of movement..

In Automatic mode tracking of a target should continue regardless of target direction provided rate of closure/opening is sufficiently high.

It is considered by pilots to be quite problematic, overloading the data computer and generating numerous false returns. It is primarily intended for use when lacking information from the ground station concerning the target's direction.

Track-while-flyby submode is not available in AVT mode. AVT mode provides the same functionality automatically.

"SNP" (Soprovazhdenie Na Prokhode) Track-While-Flyby mode

Track-While-Flyby submode can be set in Encounter or Pursuit modes only.

Track-while-flyby mode allows the simultaneous tracking of up to 10 targets, measuring their angular position, range and rate of closure. The target with the highest rate of closure/range ratio is designated the most dangerous, and automatically marked on the display. The pilot can override the automatic selection if he decides on another target. After switching to track-while-flyby mode it is not clear if the radar continues volume scanning, and it may be that only the (up to 10) tracked targets are followed. Track-while-flyby mode will automatically follow the target marked most dangerous (automatically or by pilot override) in elevation, within the elevation limits of the radar, without pilot intervention.

The TSVM computer calculates missile launch parameters for the most dangerous target. As the range to target approaches the calculated maximum missile launch range, the radar will stop scanning for targets and transition to an 8º by 40º box pattern scan in the direction of the designated target. If the target is located, the radar will transition to single target tracking mode, and all other contacts are discarded. If no target is found within 3 cycles, the radar returns to scanning mode.

Track-while-flyby mode is intended to allow missile launch at maximum range with minimal warning to the target, by switching to true single target tracking mode as late as possible.

Mode "BL BOY" (Bleezhniy Boy) Close Combat

Close Combat mode overrides all other modes. It uses a + 37º/ -13º fixed directly ahead vertical scan that is 6º wide (2 scan lines) with a 2.5 sec scan cycle and provides semiautomatic target acquisition. The closest target present in the scan area will be locked when pressing the lockon button without having to designate it.

Close Combat mode can lockon from 450 m to 10km in range, and track a locked on target down to 250m.

It is not slewable, but fixed straight ahead only. Targets can be tracked in a closure rate range from +300 meters/second to -500 meters/second including co-speed targets.

Lockon and transition to tracking mode takes 1-2 seconds in Close Combat mode.

N019 is the USSR standard model.

N019EA is the version supplied to Warsaw Pact countries. Lacks "SP" mode.

N019EB is an export variant for general export. More downgraded. Less capable TS100.02.06 digital processor. Also lacks "SP" mode."

Chizh said on Russian forum "not to expect much improvement" regarding performance of Russian missiles after rework as he believes they are already quite accurately modeled. And R-77 is unavailable for MiG-29A anyways, it's not S model.

 

Also, the Blue side has F-14 with Phoenix missiles working just like AMRAAM but twice ranged. I don't do much MP, but even in SP it's a challenging opponent especially since it seems way too accurate.

HAHAHA, radar alamos accurately modeled...Chizh is a funny guy :lol: