Tarres

Frederf, to complete your perfect explanation only one thing, according to the Technical manual of 1982, there is no possibility of "asymmetrical loadouts", both inner or both outer pylons must be loaded with the same type of missiles or rocket pods or bombs. Example: Pylons 1-2: 2xR3S or 2xR13M, or 2xR3R, or 2xFAB100. NO R-3R in pylon 1 AND R-3S in pylon 2 allowed for example. Table here: http://www.muzeumlotnictwa.pl/index.php/digitalizacja/katalog/2309 Pages 155-156, with the corresponding settings of the selector knob and IR-Neutral-SARH switch. This manual covers the weapons employed and all the parameters regarding the weapon system I think. Regards!.

The ASP model that we have in the L-39 is accurate in the AA according to references manuals for non-maneuverable targets or targets maneuvering at a maximun of +2G. The Fixed mode must be used for attack a target maneuvering at +2G. Set the estimated wingspan and adjust the distance with the "distance selector" in the throttle. For a given wingspan, move the "distance selector", to the point that the inner points of the "diamond ring" touches the target. It´s like a classic Gyrosight. The ASP-PD model of the real 21bis, according to technical suplements and flight operations manuals, has the same limitations and for a dogfight, the technical manuals state that the Fixed position must be used alongside with the fixed grid, making the correspondent calculations in radii for the distance, wingspan and angles. Sorry for my english.

Frederf, the 21bis uses a "command console" a bit different but I think that the ARK-10 works in this way (based on the Flight manual and the equipment manual): 9 "presets": the pushbuttons. For the airdrome markers, they store the "OUTER" beacons, or NDB stations. 8 "bands" for the "Inner markers": I. 120-280 kHz II 280-440 kHz III 420-580 kHz IV 580-740 kHz V 720-880 kHz VI 880-1040 kHz VII 1020-1180 kHz VIII 1180-1340 kHz With a outer beacon selected, pushbutton depressed, set the "rotary" to the proper band. The Outer/inner control switches from one to another. Imagine that we have a proper ARK-10 system, modeled: Example: Anapa 215/443 in the ME, we set the 443 into a "presets box" (like the ark-22 of the KA-50), channel 1 In flight, we push the "1" button and the rotary in the "I" position (215 is the inner beacon frequency, so "I" is the correct subrange) With the inner/outer selector we can change between them. NDB beacons, like Dzhugba for example, are set in the "presets box" of the ARK-10 in the ME, in this case the "rotary" is not necessary. Example: in a "presets box" we set "420" in the "2" and in flight we push the "2" button and we have indication to the Dzhugba NDB. Sorry for my english.

Technical manual about the ARK-10 and other radio equipment of the MiG-21bis (in polish) http://www.muzeumlotnictwa.pl/index.php/digitalizacja/katalog/2310 It includes the R-802V radio, MRP-56, ARK-10, SPU-9 and the non modeled SOD-57 and others. Thanks to some1 for the link.

2.0.1u1 and 1.5.3 are now the same I think, except the terrain of course. EDIT: The Mirage differences... Yes Neil, I forgot it. Thanks!

Totally agree with Phantom, And I think that could be better if we could have the option in the Mission Editor, alongside the hood and solo options.

It is not related with the autopilot. https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/view.php?id=93 It´s related with the Weapons System. The "lock button" is also a "damper" button for the ASP in Gyro mode, like in the F-86 for example. So the "unlock feature" was the bug, these bug prevented the use of the "damper". Whit the corrected ASP in the 1.5.4 patch and following patches, this feature is necessary to have a proper ASP sight.

The limitations could be overcome with the "manual mode of the RSBN" and the NDB system IRL is in not way related with the RSBN or the PRMG systems. Systems that are differents. I have no problems flying in Nevada or Georgia with the 39 with the RSBN in manual mode and the RKL-41 system. The 21 had limitations IRL and I think that the way to enjoy a simulation is to known its weakness. Maybe I'm too old.

Teo, the rsbn system is in the map and coded in the LUAS from the Blackshark 1 onwards alongside with the VOR, TACAN, ILS and so on...

All the navigation system in the LN-21 is far from be accurate to the real one. https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/m/issue_page.php?id=61 It's a common "RSBNPRMGNDBILSTACANVORVORTACAN..." in a single file. This approach allow them to use the same system for any kind of projects (modern, old, western, Soviet...) Maybe for the next Viggen project we could have a proper nav system and not this kind of "same approach for all kind of navigation aids". Frederf, yes in that post I changed the inner and outer beacons by mistake.

The MRP-56 marker beacon system it is not modeled according to the developers. https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.com/m/issue_page.php?id=63

Flight operations and technical manuals states that interceptions below 1500 meters have to be performed in visual only conditions without radar help. Like Keule said, the RP-22SMA it's not designed to low level interceptions. Bellow 3-2000 meters its capabilities are degraded and bellow 1500-1000 meters are inexistents.

Yes, a pair of books about the development of the 25 series, from Aerofax and Midland publishing and a pair of books from Osprey publising. I will post their ISBN references later. Maybe it could be better the TM variant, only prototypes from a 25T prototype conversion, to have "almost" the capabilities that the 25T has now in the sim. Unfortunately the SM is too new, even when it' s only a modest upgrade. Edit: references. Aerofax and Midland Publishing: Su-25 the Soviet Union Tank Buster. Osprey Publishing: Air Vanguard Su-25 Frogfoot and Combat Aircraft Su-25 Frogfoot in action. Obviously the Ed team has a wide catalog of references and I could be wrong.

I prefer a 25A over that a 25T but if the 25T is modeled without "licenses", that is for example modeled without SEAD, with the real and limited WCS and so on, yes It could be an interesting module. Are you sure that you want a full fidelity SU-25T with all the real limitations? It' s a joke... It could be a great module or modules.

UTM CETKA, I think that is the UTM grid and maybe the MGRS? grid.

822 is the NDB freq, 820 is the RSBN frequency.

Maybe a bug. Radio presets in the R-832M seems to be different between Front and rear cockpits. In instant action, cold start (L-39C), export data indicates that the front cockpit has 305Mhz frequency in channel 0 and in the rear cockpit, exported data indicates 118Mhz in channel 0. Both cockpits must be have the same presets, maybe its related with the updated that the L-39 receive 2 patches ago when the R-832 was updated with VHF and UHF frequencies. Thanks in advance.

If it's closed I can't request an explication or what are your documents to give this answer. Ok. You can launch but your missile will act as a rocket, now it acts like a AIM-9X or a R-73M. So, what's the point to have a R-13M or a R-13M1 or a R-60 (graphically apart) if you don't have to cope with their limitations? On the other hand the bombs departs from the hardpoints at excess of xG, BUT MAGICALLY your APU launchers and associated systems can cope with parameters that excess their limits. And your answer that the RS-2US saw a wide service and we don't need a safety trigger or the new radio instead of one thing that your team had simulated ok, the R-802 with the only bug being a typo (now we have a R-832 V/UHF set) or thanks to LN you don't need to cope with the limitations of a 60's nav-system (magically you've got an overmodeleded system with plenty of WP) but we don't have the possibility to use the manual mode of the RSBN that would allow us to navigate in every map without cope with Lua files, and yes I know that this mode it isn't very precise. ...well I hope that your next project will be better due to the fact that will be done from scratch and not based on an ancient FC mod with the limitations that it had. I'm too old for this kind of answers Mr Dackard. Have a nice weekend. Yours sincerely, Miquel Serrat Ripoll

And the flight manual of the MiG-21bis and the technical manuals states that 2G/1.3G on high altitude, were the limits for the launch for the R-3S and 3.7g the limits of the R-13M. Same missile, same APU launchers.

In the LN-21, the R-3S can be fired in excess of their real limit of 2G, correctly modeled in the L-39C/ZA. Same applies for the R-3R (Oficial manuals and technical manuals) R-13M had a limit of 3.7G according to manuals and museums. You can fire it outside of this envelope safely in the sim. R-13M was like a AIM-9G more or less. The R-55, that shares the same seeker form the R-3S, and the RS-2US (apart for be incompatible with a RP-22SM radar set and being 50´s tech) are... well... non coment... In the L-39C/ZA the R-3S acts like a GAR-8, try to fire it outside the limits and the system doesn´t let you to fire the missile, or try to get a lock with the sun in front of you...

I wonder if it could be possible to a add a new column with a simple "added to x.x.x version" once the request has been published in a patch.

The voices in the training missions of the L-39C are recorded in russian. Texts are in English. Maybe a conflict in the i10 folder of the .miz archives? Thanks in advance.

The USAF E-3 block was designed for WVR training, so it´s not surprising. Maybe the export Tiger II had an IFF system as a customer requeriment.

Ok. Thanks Cofcorpse.

No AN/APX-72 or 101? I though that was a standard equipment. Source: F-5E Flight manual, section 1, page 94-95 (T.O.F-5E1 1978 )