FAO Alfa (or other Mig-29 guru)

It seems that some people are confused on the MiG-29S (9-13) load out. There was an "incident" on the 504th server today where 3 pilots thought that 4 R-27ET's are acceptable and quoted a link to a website as proof but we all know that there are sites out there that say the su-27 can carry the R-33 and other such nonsense. :megalol:

This is what the accepted load out on the 504th server looks like. Reflecting Shepski's realism mod.

Pylon 1 & 7: R-60M, R-73 or R-77

Pylon 2 & 6: R-60M, R-73 or R-77

Pylon 3 & 5: R-60M, R-73, R-77, R-27T, R-27ET, R-27R, or R-27ER

Does the loadout we accept reflect real life?

Does the loadout we accept reflect real life?

No.

No.

Could you expand your answer please. A simple no does not help me understand what loadout the real MiG-29 (9-13) can carry.

All sources I have looked out suggest that only 2 ET/ER can be carried or 6 R-77's.

Propably goes without saying that we are talking only a2a loadouts here..

THe Mig can only carry the R-27 series of missiles on the inboard pylons, insofar as the A/S models go. No other pylons are wired for these missiles.

 

This is what the accepted load out on the 504th server looks like. Reflecting Shepski's realism mod.

 

Pylon 1 & 7: R-60M, R-73 or R-77

Pylon 2 & 6: R-60M, R-73 or R-77

Pylon 3 & 5: R-60M, R-73, R-77, R-27T, R-27ET, R-27R, or R-27ER

 

Does the loadout we accept reflect real life?

Yes it does :) . R-27 missiles can only be carried on pylons 3 & 5, while R-77 can be carried on all 6 pylons just like the R-73.

I am little less confident about the versions of R-27 missiles though. Some sources claim that the MiG-29S(unlike the MiG-29) can deploy the "long burn" R-27ER version, but I am not really sure whether this is actually the case for the ones currently in service with the VVS - I remember reading the chief designer saying something along the lines of the R-77 missile having been integrated with the WCS of the 9-13S and that the R-27ER could be too......which in my book would indicate that it wasn't at the time :) .

I am also having a hard time finding information on the R-27T in connection with the MiG-29 - I don't see any reason why it shouldn't be able to deploy it, but then it might a tactical consideration why it apparently isn't - i.e. that the IR version is meant to be used as a supplement to the radar guided version and since the MiG-29 can carry only one set of R-27 missiles.....well :hmm: .

Cheers,

- JJ.

THe Mig can only carry the R-27 series of missiles on the inboard pylons, insofar as the A/S models go. No other pylons are wired for these missiles.

Yup that's correct :) . MiG-29M/K can carry up to four including the long burn versions though.

Cheers,

- JJ.

Thank you GG and Alfa.

I have a book called "designed for the kill" about prototypes which has a few interviews with the Sukhoi and MiG design team. I'll have to dig it out of the attic to quote it word for word but it was something along those lines.

Thank you GG and Alfa.

 

I have a book called "designed for the kill" about prototypes which has a few interviews with the Sukhoi and MiG design team. I'll have to dig it out of the attic to quote it word for word but it was something along those lines.

. . . . when I was back at Uni for a bit of a bash last week I killed a bit of time (while everyone else was recovering from their stinging hangovers) by hunting down the aviation section in the Uni library.

There's some really good stuff in there . . . . including a book entited "MiG - fifty years of secret aviation design"

It listed two features of the -29S that I didn't recall seeing before (doesn't mean much :P ) were that the leading-edge-flaps are now divided into five segments in four (attention to detail!), and a bit about the flight controls - I quote:

"the conventional flying controls were optimised to increase the AoA operating range (up to 28 degrees) to augment the aircraft's steadiness in flight and controllability at high AoA's, and to move back the trigger limit of unintentional stalls and spins"

Sounded funky, wondered if we were to do some proper test flying whether it'd be represented in the Lomac FM :)

I think extreme conditions may not be so well modelled in LOMAC's SFM :(

But I might be wrong.

I recall reading from some place that the basic 29A has AoA limit of 26 degrees, while the S version has it at 28 because of the modifications BGP described.. can anyone confirm this?

I can.;) This has been done during intensive flight tests in the mid 80s. Actualy the only dofference between the two modifications is the reajustment of the SOS-404 AOA limiter of the S. It engages(creates strong opposite force to the pilot's input) at 28' instead of 26 for the A.

Could you expand your answer please. A simple no does not help me understand what loadout the real MiG-29 (9-13) can carry.

 

All sources I have looked out suggest that only 2 ET/ER can be carried or 6 R-77's.

I didin't undurstand your question. I was thinking if you was asking about that Mig-29 can carry four R27

Just an update guys.

Because of people with crazy payloads such as R-77 armed Su-33's and A-10's (with 4 AIM-9's, 10 Mavericks and 2 BL755's) spoiling the server over the past few days we have posted this on our forums.

http://www.vvs504.co.uk/squadforum/showthread.php?t=2762

If anyone has any questions or comments on this please feel free to PM me either here or on our squad forums.

Someone had to put their foot down... good job:)

I thought Dics said some while ago that 2xAIM9*2 is possible in real life? Guess it's not the software mod featured in lomac, or something else then.

I thought Dics said some while ago that 2xAIM9*2 is possible in real life? Guess it's not the software mod featured in lomac, or something else then.

Yes, the 2 AIM-9's on each wing is perfectly legit (though they usually only fly with 2 + ECM) it's the 10 Mavericks and 2 BL-755 (british clusters) that don't add up. hehehe.

Conclusion: Whatever the loadout is, if it is not a standard 1.12a loadout it is CHEATING! :pirate:

Conclusion: Whatever the loadout is, if it is not a standard 1.12a loadout it is CHEATING! :pirate:

Correction: payload not reflecting RL is cheating:)

talking only about the 504th server...

So all those people flying Su-27 in 1.01 (edit) & using EA's are cheating?

So all those people flying Su-27 in 1.02 & using EA's are cheating?

Yes, EA's were removed after 1.01.

:-) I've edited my post to

"So all those people flying Su-27 in 1.01 & using EA's are cheating?"

The point is this "Correction: payload not reflecting RL is cheating" is not always true. (see iguanaking's ongoing complaint about the rockets loaded to the A-10 ingame)

:-) I've edited my post to

 

"So all those people flying Su-27 in 1.01 & using EA's are cheating?"

 

The point is this "Correction: payload not reflecting RL is cheating" is not always true. (see iguanaking's ongoing complaint about the rockets loaded to the A-10 ingame)

Well, the development of the EA has just started (name will probably be R-27AR), and it is meant like an upgrade, to phase out the old -R seekers. So, if the time were somewhere in 2008, then it would be believable, but only for Ukraine, as they are doing the upgrade.

Same goes for R-77s on Ukrainian mig-29's.

Cheating implies some intent though & if you're playing with default loadouts you're not cheating - even if they don't conform with reality. (Unless someone very plainly told you not to before joining the server)

What about su-27s with R-60m's on the R-73 capable pylons? In the prototype state the su-27 carried r-60M's. And, , I know this is not real, but, in 1.2, when the Aim-9P will be included, will it be legit to arm Su-27/Mig-29s with them, to have a better missile digfighting experience, without high off-bore, all aspect nonesense?