Ala13_ManOWar

Funnily enough, no, the competence map doesn't look "fantastic", like at all… it looks like games of the first 2000 which is baffling in, what we're now? 2022… Shocking, to be honest. I expected it could be better than what's been released, not that I care of now but I like to see those good pieces of work. But this one isn't greatly better than other stuff I used to fly 15 years ago, which is shocking to be honest. Colour palette? Ok, granted, that's better but that's no merit at all, that's the easiest part of it. The lower detail in general, the inexistent coast lines, the objects low poly and texture resolution (don't get me started on that same about "brand new" aeroplanes looking like the ones I used 20 years ago in games). No, it's definitely no better whatsoever, I thought it could be but it's not and I hardly doubt they could match it any time soon while they keep using the dated graphics engine they use. Colour of the grass? Yes, that's better, honestly not enough for me . And anyhow, of course keep the update to DCS map coming all the way, not saying we don't need it, but come on guys… not even close, and that's despite the many years and problems our DCS Normandy map might have which is more reasons to add to the shocking look of it being a brand new thing…

Yeah, but you were mentioning governor, never mind. I remember in the old days when the module first came out, people tested that and the 10 seconds were there. I guess the update to the engine cooling model was deeper than we can just glimpse.

In inverted flight the pumps don't stop working, they are just starved of anything to pump since oil is the other way around. Pumps break because they run "dry" for too long, but inverted flight itself has nothing to do with pumps themselves, I believe. I think you're statement is a bit misleading in that.

I don't think so since they're handling only Spanish Air Force material. Unless they can manage that sort of data from French Air Force or the like I believe it'd quite difficult/impossible to do so. Anyhow, F1M version should be even more capable than those. Let's see when we get it (last one planned).

It is fun to fly, a lot, it cannot be disappointing unless you're nitpicky as hell. Do with that info as you please.

After the F1EE is released .

Good landing there . Anyhow, try not to come in too low, runway is hidden under your nose and you're literally hanging from the engine, it's always better a bit higher glide path with a lower engine setting. Not like engine stop is a problem in sims (one doesn't pay the bills after all ) but it's more optimal from a flight perspective and you can see the runway better all the approach.

You should use 2700rpm on final approach so in case of go around you have power available, with 2300 engine response is sluggish and slow and you might end in problems. That's the reason for that although as always the "sim reality" might be different than RL. Anyhow, it isn't said anywhere how much manifold pressure you should use, so 2700rpm means nothing to engine power, or excessive power, if you lower your manifold to whatever you need. You have to slow down the aircraft well before final approach, low manifold, keep nose at the horizon/try to keep altitude, and you'll see how it slows down nicely and easy, no matter how much rpm you set as far as manifold is low enough. As soon as you slow to 150mph and drop down gear/flaps it's not going anywhere from there and 2700 are really welcome to keep the glide path in the dirt aircraft. Just practice that slow down technique, it's useful for any aircraft in the world, not only P-51.

Ok, I give you that, it isn't terrible looking (never said it is), the external 3D model on the other hand was born flawed and that's the worst part of it definitely. Though age is still present , I know the "pointy" edges in A-8 cockpit are a bummer in front of ones' eyes, but it's still way better just because newer and that's there also. I wish I had those gorgeous wings of the A-8 in the Dora…

Yep, in the "cushion" it definitely is, albeit sadly it shows its age despite the relatively recent retexturing.

1000% true. People claim for realism until realism slap them in the face. But I personally like it like that, it wouldn't be DCS otherwise.

Yeah, you're right, the leather "cushion" was the word I wasn't finding to describe that. It's rounded as it should because it's stuffed, the top of the dashboard (I believe that's here) is a flat metal sheet though, so it's squared in the joints, but the stuffed leather cushion rounds the front of it. The lower RL pic shows exactly the same actually, stuffed cushion rounded though metal sheets joints are pointy, but DCS cockpit lacks a bit of "roundness", or something like that, in the cushion and it only, and apparently because the 3D model is surly rounded, shows the pointy edges of the dashboard flat metal sheets like that were the only detail there while the leather roundness is lost in the lack of a light and/or shadow showing it's there. Still I'm not sure I'm explaining myself at all . Anyhow, even with that I'd rather prefer this cockpit in the Dora than the oldie it shows nowadays, A-8 is still quite good.

Actually, the dashboard isn't exactly angular, the A-8 module panel and dashboard is correct but the shadows plays a trick in the eye to look all of it more angular than it actually is. In the actual pictures below you can see how it's the very same with RL pics though there're no shadow trick there so it looks rounded even on top of the actually angular dashboard top. Hard to explain in words anyhow, I hardly doubt anyone will understand what I just said .

Pity, though I guess at least it could be shot?

I believe for the moment it's only the ramp with the thingy on top, but I also believe I've seen a mod where you could make it fly somehow. Search the downloads section in the main page, or these forums, I'm not sure the exact place where I saw it.

I know, too many people take it too serious, even my words are taken too serious and out of context but that's story of my life, pretty used to it .

Ya es raro. Puedes intentar hacer repair por si hace algo.

Whatever, but I'd really like to explain something you obviously don't know about me and my words. It's your fault assuming too far from me, not mine, but…

Yeah, because that kind of answers boasting a clear superiority syndrome while obviating some things are always helpful either . PM me if you'd like to talk more widely and I'll explain something you didn't get.

Yeah, it happens when a stupid request is stupid in 2015 and still stupid in 2022 or 2032 . Sometimes I believe certain people think of this like an open menu restaurant where you can order anything and the cook will make you whatever just because your pretty face. I mean, really guys? Let me clarify the thing. No, it's not "just" making the tail wheel fixed and that's all, an "easy five minutes copy paste code thing" as some people think about so many things in DCS. If you make tail wheel fixed it has an impact on flight model, which you have to calculate, it would be like having another more model in the module. It would be like asking the Bf109K to have the fixed tail wheel, more usually than not welded gear doors and fixed tail wheel, and/or main gear doors removed as it were the case again more often than not. And then again, why keep it K-4 when you almost have a G-10 with all those modifications? Yeah, no, I'm not saying that kind of things wouldn't be interesting and appealing for the sim, planeset, mission makers and all, but it's like a new aircraft on top of the aircraft already having two models in one. It wouldn't be """just""", definitely no. Make it a request in the wishlist and perhaps at some point, definitely not tomorrow, devs can do something with regards to it. But sneaking it at main thread, or bug list like some people do sometimes, won't make it less of a wishlist request, and not an easy one.

I'm not sure it was ever in Spanish Air Force service which is the reference for this module. But since it's "just" a fuel tank maybe it's not impossible for them to include it provided good reference for the subject.

You can test by yourself how bad it is just using a single pylon or the double rack, the aircraft flies noticeably worst. Single pylons are streamlined after all, but the double rack being a later affix wasn't probably tested a lot for drag and all.

Ok, nice post by the way, and glad you kept it really civil and all. Thanks for that mate . Actually I fully agree it's not s fun vs realism debate or the like, whatever one enjoys or have fun with is irrelevant to the realism or lack of of the module. I like realism by the way, just not only the systems realism buttonwise thing, for me the realism of the flying part is also very relevant, and DCS is the only platform allowing us to do so to this level, just that. Off the flight envelope modelling is tough for every developer, it's just a kind of an impossible task without so many data we'll hardly see it fully implemented ever, but it's still good enough as it works, and MiG-21 FM is not that bad at all. From my stand point it's really enjoyable. Systems and all, I know there's differences, hope dev can manage to enhance it with the new info they got from a different source, but I'm not complaining how it is, I haven't flown a real MiG-21 ever to complain about how it works, and either offline or online I think it still is enjoyable as is. Hope it gets better, sure I do, but since we don't know either when we would get those updates (and still it's a hell of a lot of a job to devs on a niche game to ask them) I can't tell anybody it's a bad module and not to buy it, it's quite enjoyable even as is. Just that. If it doesn't cut it for you preventing to enjoy the module it's Ok, but that's not everyone's position on that matter for sure, which is also what I tried to show there even though mine can also not be the main position here .

A eso me refería, esas bombas son del MiG-21, vamos que el armamento existe dentro del juego, no es mod. El mod probablemente es que alguien las haya colocado en ese F117 (que ya es estrambótico, una bomba nuclear táctica rusa en un F-117 ), y entonces por ahí puedes tirar para hacer la modificación si ves cómo las han implementado ahí, le haces un copy/paste y las colocas en el avión que sea que las quieras usar. Sé que hay un LUA donde está la lista de armamento para cada módulo, editando esa lista se podría añadir donde sea, supongo, y luego ya que el pilón de ese avión y en esa posición te lo acepte ya es otro tema del que no tengo ni idea. Suerte .

Pero comenta por aquí cual es la modificación que estás buscando, quizá haya algo.