All Activity

For SP, maybe. However, a new sort of GCI has been promised by ED. In MP, good squadrons have GCI. The MiG-29, like all other fighters, was not meant to fly lone-wolf. That is one of the issues with how we use to play MP in a very unrealistic way. Join a virtual squadron, you are not going to regret it.

Thanks. HB has released for Viggen, and hope Tomcat is next.... Anyway, thanks for the hard work

Ну, полноценный прибор тоже не попадает в поле зрения и приходится мотать головой, что бы считать информацию, плюс вместе с директорными планками эта палочка показывает прохождение ЛЗП, и очень удобно по ней ориентироваться, что бы не вилять как маркитанская лодка вокруг этой ЛЗП руководствуясь только планками.

VPForce Rhino worked first time, no issues. Strange. I just let the stick wander around doing it's thing and it all worked.

That bug has been removed, thanks! :)

Has anyone tried using an mh16 grip with a warthog extension or virpil and the cables used for a them? This would be an ideal solution as well, as I could use the mh16. Unfortunately seems like moza doesn't sell any kind of cables themselves. The virpil extension with cable is only 25 Euros and seems pretty decent. If it works might be even worth buying the curved version.

While I'm very much enjoying the MiG-29 overall, I fear that the SPO-15 is going to absolutely crater sales - and I say that as a dedicated Redfor guy who very much wants the MiG-29 to sell like hotcakes - so we can get a MiG-23, MiG-25, Su-17/22 etc. Having no effective way to detect enemy locks (let alone launches) is going to get real old, real fast for most players.

TMWH, thrust levers set to "slider" in axis control, followed Wags' and GR's cold start YT videos, but the hyraulic pressure indicator is not anywhere in the red bit when it comes to engines start but at rock bottom. Warning panel says "double hydro". Blyat. What's wrong?

LOL! Yes!

Agreed fully that the look, sound & feel of the module are absolutely phenomenal. ED knocked it out of the park there. But also that the avionics are such that the module may become an extremely niche product with limited sales. Full fidelity is obviously the gold standard for a flight sim, but given that DCS is still a game, players also need a few breaks here and there to make up for the tools that actual pilots would have, that we don't. (Ie GCI for Redfor planes) The SPO-15 being effectively worthless at generating any sort of useful threat indications seems likely to limit the DCS MiG-29 to 1v1 WVR dogfights, and self-made SP missions with players making liberal use of F10 to generate SA. I have a hard time imagining a playable MiG-29 campaign, if the player has little to no warning of any attack by an AI with a BVR weapon.

Насколько важна вам эта палочка, когда под КПП есть полноценный прибор.

Can a version of this skinpack be loaded from SAVED GAMES rather than the root directory? I assume, that I would have to reload each time DCS is updated as long as it's in the root directory.

I want to add an extension and already have a winwing stick with extension, so would save having to buy the moza z-axis one. I do have the mh16 and it works great so I may just use a warthog extension if that works.

that's just strange ... no wonder i couldn't work out what was wrong if it was hardware specific .. glad you got it "working"

+102

You mean it has to be programmed for the group in the mission editor? But that does not seem to be available for dynamic spawns?

No prob, nothing to laugh about. Glad i could help. Enjoy.

I have the same problem, DCS hangs when I try to access Missions, Training or Mission Editor. Renaming folder DCS\Mission Editor or deleting news.lua did not help. And here is my log file: dcs.log

I won't quibble... Yes, the 492nd and 494th got F-15Es versus Cs. The poster, however, did not specify a time period. He said, "ever"; and Es are every bit as capable of taking out MiG-29s as the Cs.

Ma davvero l'AMX??? De gustibus ma veramente per me un aereo che ha pochissimo senso, prestazioni bassissime, operatività limitata, era un bersaglio volante, veniva usato (quando non era messo forzatamente a terra), per missioni minori dove era meno oneroso da impiegare rispetto al Tornado. Mi sembra che all'inizio si stava optando per gli F16 poi si è scelto do investire sul Ghibli, ma posso sbagliarmi. Ripeto nulla contro le preferenze personali, ma per me è come sperare che su un simulatore di guida esca la Fiat Duna... Poi ci fossero i Balcani ed il Tornado capirei già di più l'interesse. Inviato dal mio SM-A536B utilizzando Tapatalk

How did you make the decals on the sticks?

The landing parachute is not synced between clients and you can only see your own. This issue has been present for years on the FC3 module and is still happening. Would be cool to have it fixed. Thanks!

It seems that there is a conflict with textures, selected units, and language on the analogue gauges in the MiG-29 Fulcrum. Settings: Gameplay - Avionics Language = English Settings: Gameplay - Units= Metric Settings: Special - Cockpit Language=English When set as above, the Mach meter reads with NM and the RAD ALT also has a texture that reads in feet. The needles themselves are not reading the correct altitude or speeds. It seems to be the incorrect texture. When settings are all in metric and the cockpit in in "Default" all the gauges work as expected and the textures have metric graduations. The HUD appears to be correct in all modes and settings. I hope that is helpful. Please reach out if you need more information. This is my first ticket and I don't have a background in troubleshooting software. Great module! Good luck.

I just stepped away. I will try when i'm turned and let you know my findings. Appreciate your help.

After Russian motors, now again a little bit about American ones. I’ve already worked something about AMRAAM motors and maybe it’s time to complete it and to make it in more decent way From top to bottom WPU-6/B, WPU-16/B and just for scale size comparison RDTT-542U. AMRAAM motors are actually very similar in concept (which I don’t like at all, by the way), propellant weights are known (in previous works I missed it and gave too much for both motors). Information about exact properties of propellants are of course not known but both are from same group of HTBP reduced smoke type. What I did is that I used now exactly same propellant properties for both motors, exact same nozzle geometry and erosion rate of it and just extracted outputs following grain geometry which is slightly different in these two motors. What is kind of strange is that first motor is classified as boost-sustain and second as all boost. While first one indeed has dual thrust curve, although with not so significant pressure (thrust) drop, second one is also with output which is actually not what would be normally called all boost motor. Why they classified it as all boost I don’t know, but it wouldn’t be first case. In what I’m pretty sure, is that geometry of grain as it is must give higher starting values then when motor is finishing its work. I like much more pressure data outputs than forces but people usually are interested in forces only. Although internet write all kind of numbers for these motors and some ridiculous values of specific impulse (probably because it is HTPB and not only that, it is American and recently new HTPB) these outputs of mine I find as quite fair and realistic. It is 12400kgs and 11100kgs of total impulses or average 240s sea level specific impulse which looks fair and square.