303_Kermit

Would you buy a new car that's broken? Or Ice creams with salmonella? Or maybe would you like to buy flat-screen with some broken pixels? For a guy who buys MiG-21 from Letherneck it's not an old module. It's brand new, and he has right to expect it to work properly. If it's not possible, and MiG-21 is considered "out of date" like old sausage, consider similar procedure. Remove outdated product from the shelf. Otherwise it's unfair. Anyway. A subject of the topic was "how's Letherneck sims?" I gave a fair feedback. I don't demand anything. I give a fair customer review. Compared to Heatblur, Rasbam or other 3'rd party they're IMO not recommended.

Except SAU not working properly, ARU not even in slightest way working properly, Radar much to efficient at low altitude, Strangely modeled elevator behavior at high altitudes (over 15 000m) pulling hard with ARU in manual mode set in position "Take off" (strangely it's also the same position in "Auto" mode on these altitude) gives slight, gentle turn with about 2G. Plane is able to sustain 9,8 G (it was reduced couple months ago from previous bigger value). However many MiG-21 pilots reported exceding G over "11" without damaging a plane in DCS MiG sustain just 9,8G. If you pull 8,5 G crazy ARU may cause exceding G to over 10 and brake your... Wing tips (sic!) instead of bending your wing, but it's ok. You can fly (and land) MiG-21 without wings anyway. Other case is gyro sight - switch positions give different effect as expected: in pure Gyro mode only 300m range works as expected, auto ranging works different as expected (based on original flight instruction), A2G mode - shooting unguided rockets with rdr ranging and gyro gives also wind correction -> way too acurate, A2G bombing sight is a pure fantasy. It gives you precise hit point for FAB's with wind correction. A ballistic table For manual bombing with various dive angles and sight deflection angles doesn't exist. Also MiG-21 Cluster bombs are able to kill every server since I play DCS, Letherneck / Magnitude never attempted to correct these issues. Engine flames out after exceding 1300KIAS which is a total fantasy (and explanation given in DCS manual is made-up total fiction. It doesn't fit liquid mechanic, or jet engine behavior). Speed shall be limited by loosing longitudinal/directional stability and there is a proper description how it works in real MiG-21. And "the devs " are well aware about it. Modelling a proper behavior is too much effort i suppose? Engine flame out (due to over-speeding) is pure fiction (and a lie). If you report any problem the answer is "It's old module so we're not supporting it - in fact you shall be graceful for everything we make around it anyway. You shall not expect any support for an oldest DCS module. Currently all resources are directed towards F-4U anyway. No MiG-21 major updates before F-4U release." Except that, it's a legendary plane, and most neglected module in DCS With my best regards Kermit

Mostly used variant of MiG-21 in Syria, Egipt and Iraq was FL. It's India built PFM-isch MiG-21. Please note a 4 pylons and no integral gun. Also much weaker engine than the one in bis. Originally in they carried R-3S. Iraq -modified their planes to carry Matra 550 Magic Syria - lost dozens of their MiG-21 to Israeli F-15, Kfir's, Mirage III Egipt - rather bought MiG-23MS (downgraded MiG-23 with R-3S missiles and a radar RP-22 Almaz(sometimes called Sphire in various sources) from MiG-21bis. A2G - everything except Grom missile. and of course - no cannon

You won't be a challenge you'll become a practice target. Me262 isn't a bomber, and surely unarmed recon is not a reason to buy a module. The other problem is, that there's no recon implemented in DCS. P-38! B-17! B-24!

Huey! + "Jumping jack flash" in a loop

I would be very cautious with Israeli combat reports. They're seriously confusing. I do believe it's on purpose. Nothing strange about it to be honest. There are full of stories, when you never know what plane pilot flew. You may only assume or suppose, that it's Phantom, because pilot once says "we" and on the other time during the same story says "me". Glory to the Kheil HaAvir, but they're not quite... Most reliable source of information. They're rather a source of various MiG-parts. F-4J has Pulse doppler radar. Navy had much better device since they resigned from M-61A1 Vulcan in the nose. That's why, without gun in the nose their radar has bigger antenna and it's a quite different device, than USAF F-4E Pulse radar. F4E posese a ground clutter filter. It helps detecting airborne tgts if they fly lower, but not close to the ground, by limitting and separating signals that comes back from the same direction, but after different time period. So If AGL is big enough you may detect someone who flies lower. Most cases however MK 1 Eyeball will be more effective considering detection range of APQ-120 I'm amazed by something another. 9:57 "There was a water in Datalink compartment". F-4J had datalink on board? My best regards Kermit

I love these plane

Agree. Just to complement: TPQ System was extensively used in Vietnam , especially during rain season. It allowed to attack targets in north Vietnam in spite of heavy cloud cover. F-4 having a Vulcan onboard had to sacrifice quite a lot of avionics. For a start Navy had bigger radar antenna, also IR sensor is not present in USAF planes (not that it's a big lost). As for Navy: F-4J was first fighter in the world with look down /shoot down capabilities There's more about it, but somehow I assume you know quite well about it. My best regards Kermit

"The General Electric AN/TPQ-1O Course Directing Central was a light-weight, two-unit, helicopter transportable, ground based bombing system developed for use by the United States Marine Corps to provide highly accurate, day/night all weather close air support. This self-contained system was designed to guide an aircraft, equipped with the proper control equipment, to a release point for accurate all-weather delivery of ordnance and supplies to a preselected target. The AN/TPQ-10 and its operators were known as an ‘’Air Support Radar Team’’ (ASRT) and were employed by the Marine Air Support Squadrons within the Aviation Combat Element." by Wikipedia (eng.)

Different 8 (thicker and wider) tyres, stiff, thicker wings. Rear cockpit has side consoles (Navy has not). J79GE-8 vs GE-15 , AN/APQ-99 vs 100, also US Navy had a device that allowed them to bomb targets through cloud cover. It included TPQ-10 ground radar, ballistic computer, and reciver device onboard Phantom II / Intruder / "Hump" equipped Skyhawk E/F and later also A-7

I wanted to write "No wonder they flew over 20 000 combat sorties", but then I checked that F-100 did 360 000 combat sorties. So... Was it because of high alt profile of 105's flights? Or because F-105's made in Vietnam mostly A2G sorties without AiM-9 under wings? “I manoeuvred to superimpose my pitot boom over the MiG, squeezed the trigger and saw the 20 mm rounds sparkling along the left fuselage and wing root of the MiG. His left wing folded over the tail and in an abrupt left turn he went into a cloud at about 2500 ft"

USN Phantoms IMO are prettiest planes of all times

I'd like you to show me how you make sandwich before engagement. There are couple way to cooperate in dogfight. There are a certain rules for it - it helps a little. Having a "Game plan" certainly helps. Defining Hot-cold directions before T/O, short and precise communication, mostly - it's a lot of flight hours spent online - not offline with your squad mates.

Not nearly as frustrating as early F-105 armed with early M-61 Vulcan. Usually jamming after about 200 rounds. Pilots used to use a pitot tube to aim.

After I read Bill Gunston "F-4 Phantom" I want F-4B more than any other plane!

I think the proper book to answer that question is only flight manual of P-4E (proper prod. series). There are usually a lot of such information. I'm sure Heatblure posses all the necessary info. I ordered also bill gunston's monography about F-4. I'll post as soon as I found something new. I'm not the only one crazy about F-4... Good to hear With my best regards Kermit

F4 Phantom II vs MiG-21 USAF and VPAF in The Vietnam War Peter Davies. About F4E (Vietnam) "(...)In addition to a nose mounted gun, the aircraft had J79-GE-17C engines, uprated to 17900LBS maximum thrust. However like previous 79's the engines still emitted thick black smoke trail except of afterburner. These made the aircraft visible for up to 30 miles. Fixes were developed, but never implemented during the war. The new nose was adopted following the pitment of the lighter more compact AN/APQ-120 solid state radar and antenna which was heavily insulated against gunfire vibration. [...]RAT and wing folding mechanisms were removed (I quote, but kill me If I understand) "Although, the slats and the extra weight of the gun and number 7 fuel tank reduced maximum speed to below Ma = 2 crews welcomed the new wing configuration, as it made the Phantom 2 almost spin proof." [...] (and) Finally (in?) F-4J increased control effectiveness. " (It was also placed in chapter about F-4E) "the F4 radar was very difficult to use in its standard mode. we had serious problems getting a radar lock on a maneuvering tgt., that then it allowed a missile to be launched. As a solution to our issues with the APQ-72, the radars in our jets were modified so that with a flick of a switch they could be slaved in azimuth and elevation to the nose of the aircraft, creating a narrow , forward pointing beam." (Crews called it BORESIGHT mode) "The B/C/D F4 radios were often criticized. In designing the AN/ARC-105KF radio, Collins radio corporation struggled with electromagnetic interference and placement of antennas, particularly in aircraft tail. During maneuvering flight the tail mounted antenna may be blocked by the airframe, interrupting transmissions. In the F4, rain leaking into the cockpit was channeled directly to the radio and access to it or its battery. " Most statements comes from pilots quotations. The book itself I would say is a bit... Hurray - USA ? With my best regards Kermit

Offense not taken. Thanks for info. English is not my first language. As for further text . Maybe I wasn't clear enough. I wasn't going to convince you , that "bis" is the same plane as F-13 or PF(M). I just pointed, that with some imagination you may create such scenario. Remove gun ammo, give RS-2US and R-3S, disable additional pylons and you have something similar to PF. It is in no way identical to PF, but it's best we have. It's some sensible adjustment.

There's only one way to prove you wrong. Do you fly Enigma? I'll be glad to show you what is a sandwich, pincer movement in rolls dice variant, or grinder You'll probably change your mind.

Why there's no "C" ? Also multiple choices poll would be more adequate. I would vote for B,C,D,E,J,G Do you know that F-4E (Vietnam war type) wasn't able to reach Ma=2 ? Was slower than MiG-21 just like British variants... most powerful and slowest Phantoms

Did I hit a weak spot of F-16 geek? You make my day. Thanks. True... MiG 21 is so easy to fly, that almost every video "First time on MiG-21" starts from crash - usual on both: takeoff and landing Also videos about RSBN approach are quite... Amusing. Yes no brainer it is. As far as I read about F-4E, the earliest variants are being mentioned in Vietnam since 1968. F-4E was upgraded multiple times. Engines (early ones were smoking badly) radio, radio-navigation systems. All true, but it's also true (according of Heatblur declaration) That they are going to introduce 2 variants of F-4E clasic and late. Also they are going to give us a F-4 family, so there's hope for B,C,D, J ... all served in Vietnam As for MiG-21. In Vietnam served MiG-21 in Variants: F-13, PFL(?), PFM, (M?), MF (those are most popular) We have none of them in DCS Right? Well.... not quite. Bis was one of first official mods to DCS. Therefore it was assumed, that she has to fulfill a full spectrum of Mikoyan fighters. The first example of these idea are missiles carried by bis in DCS. No MiG-21 bis could ever carry RS-2US. The reason is incompatible radar. For RS-2US you need radar from PF/PFM. Placing those early missiles on bis (R-55, RS-2US, R-3S) was in purpose of allowing to simulate some early cold war scenarios. The biggest advantage of bis is of course EPR, but surprisingly basic performances of MiG-21 stayed the same from F-13 to bis. Speed and time of climb to maximum altitude. As for Vietnam map - That's the last true air-war in History. After that enemy air forces used to be annihilated in 12-24 hours. 3'rd World War never started (thank you Allah, Yehowa, Christ, Zeus, Odin) so "Fulda Gap" was never an arena of air combat operations. Anyway... Fulda gap is more a subject for Tank-Sim enthusiasts than DCS. With my best respect to all fans of F-4, MiG-21 & all those interested in Vietnam War history, and Vietnam Map for DCS Kermit

Proper alignment is realized per data link between a pair of Su-27 before lunch... And to be honest I'm sure I saw it multiple times on various sources, including Wikipedia, and Bill Gunston articles, but I'm unable to give you a reliable source of these information right now. I may search if someone's interested... I realize that for DCS one need more details to change anything. I just want to point here that it is possible... From quite a long time already. Other thing is that PESA/AESA arrays use more sophisticated methods to avoid interferency. Someone tried to explain it to me once, but I fell asleep in the middle... With my eyes opened

As much as I want to agree... WTF are you talking about? How Fox -1 can be ever equal to Fox-3? It's not the same and it won't be unless ED introuces full potential of R-27 and Su27. Originally R-27ER can be guided by a radar of other plane. I other words: You may fly low to be safe. You may prepare yourself for "notch" or "crank", do STT a target, and your wingman can lunch R-27ER for it in stratosphere, being accelerated to Ma=1,6. Theres no such thing in DCS as far as I can tell. Otherwise SATAL would be finaly very interesting... For once. In DCS only equal plane for F-16 is F-16... I have it uninstalled. Waiting for better times ... On Enigma With my best regards Green Ugly Fellow

All true. I'm reading "F-105 vs MiG-17 over Vietnam". I was amazed, by pilots complaining that... "M-61 Vulcan is too acurate. You may shoot out a single piece of enemy plane. By A2G we used to wave a pedals to create some dispersion"

True. But they weren't able to satisfy ED. Anyway... Who would fly F8F against MiG-15? I seriously doubt.