All Activity

I have found atleast 4 sources that attest to MiG-29 having blanking circuits for its radar to RWR, as was Soviet tradition for any Soviet radar equipped fighter with RWR. It’s basically undeniable it had one at this point. And I’m probably forgetting one!

Missions Editor - "Flaggen" Symbol zum Einrichten der zusätzlichen Rollen (Gamemaster, Taktischer Beobachter, etc.) Hier ist an jeder Rolle eine Checkbox vorhanden, um die Rollen optional mit einem Passwort (wird weiter unten vergeben) zu schützen. Übersetzt ist die Checkbox mit "Aufschalter" - im Original wird das wohl "locked" bedeuten. Die Deutsche Variante ist eher sinnfrei .

It's not implemented yet. But it works if you edit the files yourself. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Sorry, that's the only way. There are many requests to drag it anywhere and have DCS remember the location. Same goes for Kneeboard, (which you can move, but location is not saved), and the Controls Indicator among. Cheers! Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

please let us know what book / manual you are taking this information from. thank you threads merged, title adjusted. thank you

Not that i know, but: - remove AWACS / EWR so no data on other objects is available, unless the planes in your group have radar coverage of those units - in the F-16, leave MIDS switch to off (but that also kills the TACAN)

25cm 100 0 Due to FFB. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

oh I see now why it wasn't working, thank you for checking my mission and seeing that units beacons were not activated and now I see why... stupid me was adding the beacon activation command under Trigger tab instead of Waypoint tab (DoH!). I edited the mission and got it working now. Thanks heaps!

They were working on a standard for everyone. Settings in the Controls Settings. No idea why they pulled it. It was even there just not working. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Depends on the mission if MP is available, unless they change something. Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

This SPO-15 manual isn't specific to any particular aircraft. It describes the equipment's capabilities in general. However, specific implementations of the station varied across both design bureaus and aircraft types. What's written here doesn't directly apply to the MiG-29.

Happy you fixed it! [emoji1303] Sent from my SM-A536B using Tapatalk

Ok, after uninstalling, removing Vaicom/Voice attack and restarting the Ekran sound warning is working. Would like to start using Vaicom again, so hoping it can be fixed. TRK files attached. Mig29 Sound issue-broken.trk Mig29 Sound issue-working.trk dcs.log

В хот фиксе поправят на этой неделе

It only does this within 8 km. Feature did not make it to Fulcrum

All and i mean all their module need to have this like heatblur and aerges and it need to be made standard for older aircraft like the mig-21.

I disagree. The F-15 outperforms the MiG-29 in every way, from its radar to its flight characteristics. Which is fine, since they're different classes of aircraft.

@axe1966 @Civetta_ITA Thank you, guys !

nullThere really should be no debate. ED modeled an unserviced system.

несколько раз ловил баг с назначением клавиш, в управлении. назначаешь кнопку, а она не работает, или очищаешь команду, а в управлении все ровно остается назначенная ранее кнопка. (на джойстиках, на клавиатуре подобного не было)

Too me it looks like this is actually a misinterpretation of genuine exploitation problem for non-overhauled aircrafts (true for both GDR and YU Fulcrums) vs original design and state of aircrafts. Modeling the exploitation fault as design flaw is wrong and is not supported with the actual technical documentation. Instead the electronics aging effects should be modeled as a fault which can be ticked in mission editor for those who want to really feel how it feels to fly and fight in broken aircraft. E.g. this includes other failures, like radar range degradation, which in case of L-18 was 20-30km in 1999 (I have a direct statement of a pilot comparing the state of aircraft when they were in good condition and later when the electronics started to break down). Some of us prefer historic context, in which you fly the aircraft with such failures, but the majority of the player base actually want the aircrafts that behave according to the specs when they were new.

First, as a pilot, you should not rely on Jester. What you need to do if you get a GCI call, do a mental Bullseye Breakdown. Basically getting the position of the bogey relative to your position. If it is a BRAA call, the process is easier. If the call is a Bullseye, you should practice gaining a comprehensive perspective in your mind. Then, you initially turn to a basic intercept heading, and after that, direct Jester where to point the radar. Or jump in the backseat and do it yourself. https://flyandwire.com/procedures-and-operations-air-to-air/#geometry Also, all information by Karon is, in my opinion, a "must" read. Also, you can use a "bullseye" trainer. https://jasta712.de/bullseye_rechner/bullseye_t.html and/or use the incorporated APQ-120 sim(button is on top right)

True, but come on…it basically lacks the TACAN, IFF and radio. Only some of the german MiGs received GPS also (as far as I understand). So it is very close to the version we have in DCS now.

Why are you trying to shut me up? I claim that the SPO in ED is modeled correctly, and you're wrong. I'm basing my analysis on numerous Soviet combat manuals. It's just that you don't seem to have this information.

Good morning everyone... I'm asking you, who are certainly more experienced than I am. I'm trying to prepare a campaign with my friends set in Syria in 1991, and I'd like to disable the datalinks of the F18s and F16s to make their presence more consistent in the context. Is this possible with ME? PS: I have no experience in LUA scripting.