Mateo

Thank you @Rudel_chw Your test is the confirmation of my theory that customized cockpit of MiG-29 doesn't work as it should. I will report it to ED. Best Regards

Could some of you try to choose customized cockpit in DCS. One of below two examples are valid. I can't force it work (just like mine), but I could before last two updates. https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3335443/ https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/2081947/ I hope someone will help, ED ticket didn't solve it. Best Regards, Mat

Hi, based on Devrim mod, old DCS cockpit livery and my rework of that all - I have made a new cockpit livery while waiting for FF version of MiG-29. I am going to share it, when it will be finished. Unfortunately after update 2.9.6.57650 FC3 structure of files changed and my mod doesn't work anymore. I have copied the cockpit files to new folder: D:\DCS\DCS World OpenBeta\Mods\aircraft\MiG-29\Liveries\Cockpit_MiG-29A\English (Mateo) I have choosen it in DCS of course, and unfortunately I see default cockpit livery instead of mine. description.lua and screens taken before update attached. Somebody advise on new file structure ? description.lua

I think UB variant would have much interest. It has got beautiful line.

My FC3 planes become authorized again last night while I did nothing. All happened on ED authorisation servers probably.

I have got stuttering effect ingame when using launcher and after turning it off the problem is gone as you said above. Thanks

Turn-off the launcher.

Very cool ideas here, not only for F16. I would appreciate any solution from above.

+1 It's a pity that update brought us such bug. Hope ED will react immediately.

I have found that modelled Pinky switch on throttle is supposed to move vertically - up/down, but it is modelled in cockpit with motion FWD/AFT. I am using winwing orion 2 with 15EX grip and it is oriented for vertical movement. What is right and what is wrong?

Yeah same here, I just hope they'll drop the Phantom soon, so that development can go full steam on the Typhoon Me either. Looking forward for Eurofighter updates !

Try DCS cleanup and repair tool.

They do, you probably expect to see radar fake targets and have realistic filtering, but it is related to FF modules. FC3 makes all that things simple, but it is still within the simulation of doppler radar so we shoudn't complain on it.

+1

It is easy to make this input set to one of two option in additional settings in DCS: - working as Force Feedback with professional stick - fictional working to match regular hardware, stick will move with SAU inputs only in cockpit view and on controls position window.

-Система автоматического управления САУ -SAU, System of automatic handling, the mechanical system that assist the pilot in handling of the aircraft, manouvering, and also autopilot within it. I would like to have model the SAU as a system, not a flight model result. In real MiG-29 the stick has moved itself, while SAU turned on - while flying manualy "via hands". You have the same feeling of the aircraft with SAU on and off because it is not a FBW, but while stayed on (normal flight) there was mixed input of SAU and pilot. It was not present in other aircrafts. It was hard to get used to for beginners, but was just obvious part of flying MiG-29. As we aim for FF MiG-29 it shouldn't be neglected and it should work as real. Best Regards, Mateo

Would be great !

Ok then, so what about flight model of new FF and previous FC3. Many complains about flight model, which might be called 'bug'* will also be present in FF model ? If yes, that's a pity. If no, it will be clear feedback for all people who reported flight model bug that their complains were right, and ED did nothing with that bugs. In my opinion MiG-29 from FC3 should stay, but telling long story short: MiG-29A FC3 and MiG-29 FF should have got the same flight performance in order to satisfy multiplayer players fighting each other. * - I am talking about real MiG-29 pilots who play FC3 and complain, most of them wrote their complains in Russian language subjects

The MiG-29S is currently the one, which could carry RVV (R77) and try to fight againts modern western aircrafts carrying AIM120. I am very enthusiastic about FF of 29A, but I am also just curious about that variant S left available in FC3 Not really, certain things are not completed. If ED team is currently don't working on it, it doesn't mean that product is feature complete. There were real pilots complains regarding flight model, ED try to improve it or disregard by showing that some of flight dynamic coefficient graphs match the real one, but some real pilots still complain as an example. As an offtopic I might add that RVV performance is not officially published but military journalist assume that Red side considered making a step back to semi active radsr guided missiles of higher range instead of expensive semi modern RVV

So there is a question to ED: What plan for MiG-29S,G,A our ED have got in future ? Will these aircraft stay supported ? Will development will be continued ? Will MiG-29G of FC3 have the same performance/flight model that MiG-29A FF when flying multiplayer pvp ? There will be some kind of confusion between these aircrafts, even all of them are quite similar - (A and G is different in avianics unit setup, and the S version is superior - have got flight controls modified and ECM) So what the future brings to our FC3 MiGs-29? Best Regards, Mateo

In my opinion discount for FC3 users should be available - even 3 to 5 USD would be kind and attract current users to buy FF module.

I have got the same issue... Thx for temporary solution.

Ok, thank you, so it is DCS limitation that might be fixed one day. Thanks for reply.

Could someone confirm of bright me up - when I am flying the F16C or F15, I can refuel with KC135, but when I set tanker as KC135MPRS, I can't - is it a bug or I am doing something wrong ? I have made simple mission, when I change one tanker for another, 135MPRS won't extend boom and won't instruct me for pre-contact.

I am happy to find this thread, I had intention to open such topic.