Mig-17 maneuverability and FM

[MigBuster 2,884]

I wonder if I change the Mig-17 FM by replacing the ...data.ini file with modified one.

Does the change take effect only when I fly the Mig-17, or also for AI driven Migs, when they are my enemy?

 

 

No the AI will fly that model as well - well with a few changes like more fuel.

[MigBuster 2,884]

Thanks for the tip Fubar. Guess that maybe the designers of the Fresco should be decorated by the West ?

 

Hou doe,

 

Derk

 

 

dunno - It came in service around 1952 and was a very good jet fighter compared to other jets of that age.

[Gr.Viper 131]

I think, the best evaluation of a fighter aircraft is whether or not the enemy is afraid of it

[Fubar512 1,350]

guyran, check your PMs, I have an AI-only model for you that will impose realistic limits on the model I've spent a few hours testing it, and found that, if you fly by the book, you can beat it...though it's still tough on your wingmen.

[ShrikeHawk 384]

Hey Fubar - If you've made a new FM for the Mig-17F, how hard would it be to modify just the regular Mig-17? What is the difference between the two?

 

So if I switch out the 17F's FM , I would like the the base 17 version to be similar.

[Fubar512 1,350]

Hey Fubar - If you've made a new FM for the Mig-17F, how hard would it be to modify just the regular Mig-17? What is the difference between the two?

 

So if I switch out the 17F's FM , I would like the the base 17 version to be similar.

 

I made one for the A, as well. The A uses essentially the same powerplant as the MiG-15, therefore it has no Forsage (afterbuner).

[ShrikeHawk 384]

I made one for the A, as well. The A uses essentially the same powerplant as the MiG-15, therefore it has no Forsage (afterbuner).

 

Hmmm. I found the 17F FM, but not the 17A one. There was a pack of Fresco_Farmer upgrades by Wrench that included several people's work. Does this include yours?

[Fubar512 1,350]

I've not uploaded them yet.

[Gr.Viper 131]

the same powerplant as the MiG-15

MiG-15bis. MiG-15 used RD-45F, which was a copy of Rolls Royce Nene Mk.2.

[Rambler 1-1 9]

Sounds to me like the easiest way to get a more realistic model is to have a max-G/speed graph with a curve rather then a slope. For example, it reaches it's highest G turns around 250-300 knots. Below that the G's are lower because of lack of airspeed, and above that Gs are lower because of lack of boosted controls.

 

That's funny, I get the feeling that I'm stating the obvious here...

[+guyran 13]

guyran, check your PMs, I have an AI-only model for you that will impose realistic limits on the model I've spent a few hours testing it, and found that, if you fly by the book, you can beat it...though it's still tough on your wingmen.

 

Fubar, I think I'm not the only one to be interested in such FM. Can you put it in the downloads sector and give us a link?

[Derk 265]

Fubar, I think I'm not the only one to be interested in such FM. Can you put it in the downloads sector and give us a link?

 

Same here Fubar.......

Had a look at some airshow movies of the Fresco at Youtube and it seemed that at least there is SOME manoeuvrability left at higher speeds.

 

Hou doe,

 

Derk

[ShrikeHawk 384]

Fubar, I think I'm not the only one to be interested in such FM. Can you put it in the downloads sector and give us a link?

 

...Or just place it here in the thread if you'd prefer to have some beta-testers before posting it. I'd love to try your FM out.

[Gr.Viper 131]

How does it compare to factory data?

[Fubar512 1,350]

Sounds to me like the easiest way to get a more realistic model is to have a max-G/speed graph with a curve rather then a slope. For example, it reaches it's highest G turns around 250-300 knots. Below that the G's are lower because of lack of airspeed, and above that Gs are lower because of lack of boosted controls.

 

That's funny, I get the feeling that I'm stating the obvious here...

 

Not really. The 17 was capable of achieving it's max G-loading well above Mach .7-.75. Simulating wingwarp can be achived by other means, and control lockup has been available in the series since at least SP (though it's "all or nothing".).

[+daddyairplanes 10,243]

another good book on the topic is Red Eagles about the 4477 TES.(damn i wish i was home!) covers the Air Forces indoctrination program throught the late 70s and 80s using the -17, -21, and -23. generally as i recall they told pilots read into the program to get the -17 above 450kts and manuever against it and with the -23 to get into a turning fight but don't try to outrun it. it could pull away from even the F-15 but was more dog than dogfighter and all the american pilots hated it. even said putting the -23 in squadron service was best favor russia did for the american fighter pilot. but below 450kts above 20000 ft the -17 was the best thing since wonder bread.

[+daddyairplanes 10,243]

also with that book(modders hint hint) is a pics section with the migs in american/soviet markings.

[+guyran 13]

NV aces like Colonel Tomb preferred the Mig-17 over the more advanced Mig-21, for a good reason…

I believe he could choose any Mig as desired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguyen_Toon

[MigBuster 2,884]

NV aces like Colonel Tomb preferred the Mig-17 over the more advanced Mig-21, for a good reason…

I believe he could choose any Mig as desired.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nguyen_Toon

 

 

Unfortunately Colonel Tomb didn't actually exist - even Wikipedia tells you that

 

Istvan Toperczer who has has researched VPAF war files tells us Colonel Tomb or Toon was fictitious. A photo of a MiG-21PF (4326) with 13 kill markings was released in 68 to the worlds press who its said wrongly credited the markings to a single pilot who they assumed was Colonel Tomb - but in fact the tally was made up by several pilots who flew 4326.

 

The real VPAF ace of aces "Capt Nguyen Van Coc" actually flew that MiG-21PF. Many of the aces flew both types.

Edited August 7, 2009 by MigBuster

[Fubar512 1,350]

Unfortunately Colonel Tomb didn't actually exist - even Wikipedia tells you that

 

Istvan Toperczer who has has researched VPAF war files tells us Colonel Tomb or Toon was fictitious. A photo of a MiG-21PF (4326) with 13 kill markings was released in 68 to the worlds press who its said wrongly credited the markings to a single pilot who they assumed was Colonel Tomb - but in fact the tally was made up by several pilots who flew 4326.

 

Well, the VPAF initially denied that 3020 had been shot down, until years later, when former VPAF pilots admited that 3020 had gone missing on the very day that Cunningham claims to have shot it down. Whoever flew it on the tenth of May, 1972, did so with great skill and tenacity.

[MigBuster 2,884]

By 1972 some of the VPAF pilots had 6+ years combat experience in various MiGs - and im pretty sure they had to be on alert 24/7 during most of that time.

 

One pilot mentioned a lot is Tranh Hanh - one of the first fighter pilots to complete training in China - became a flight leader of the 921st in 1964, promoted to command the 921st in 1966 - became deputy commander in chief of the VPAF in 1976!! "Considered to have exceptional aeronautical skill". Although he claimed kills is not actually listed in the leading VPAF aces.

 

 

sadly he only mentions 3020 in its June 1968 state used by the 923rd - which already has 7 stars on it - and saying it was used by (claimed) 6 kill ace "Le Hai" at that time.

 

On the 10th May 72 he only lists 2 pilots being shot down in MiG-17s (Nguyen Hang/ Nguyen Van Tho)- but then again he is sticking to what he was given access to in the late 1990s (which you would hope he was doing!!)