Thamiel

Same here. Out of curiosity: is your full fidelity F-5 the legacy or the remastered version? [Edit: looks like it came with the last srs patch. It worked just fine until then.]

Of course it isnt. Also, its funny to think that the western powers wouldn't consult their own departments of science to improve their hardware and machine-human-interfaces. Of course they did. Everyone did. Its the military for gods sake. The British call it "attention to detail" and it starts with boot camp. Apparently they did come to different conclusion as one would suspect when pursuing different goals and intentions. I dont pretend to know how the russian pilot is trained to fit into that cockpit to work efficiently. Maybe he is only a small dependant cogwheel who relies on lots of GCI/controller types around him telling him what to do, how to fly and when to shoot in which direction so SA may not be that important to him. [Edit: if so, have fun flying that thing in DCS/SP] Of course it is an improvement over all MiG aircraft before it. Otherwise it would not have been commissioned. The question was, where to put this module according to the gradient of its learning curve. I dont think, there is a good DCS counterpart to compare it to. As I said, the closest module in weapon capabilities would be the M2k including a strong interceptor profile. But there the comparison ends between those two.

I dont talk bare numbers of instruments, I talk ergonomics. Even the F-15A is far better than the Fulcrum in that department.

Well there is no MFD in the first place, so yeah no pages either. But instead, we have multiple speed indicators and displays of any kind and so on, a "Uhrenladen" as we say, which normally is anything but clear and understandable.

Well. I dont make a statement about how much more difficult it is, I just try to explain why someone would regard the transfer from a western cockpit to an eastern one a difficulty to begin with. I cant really compare to the F/A-18 because I dont own this "one4all" module but yeah, it seems difficult to imagine that the Mig-29 could reach the level of sophistication of multirole aircrafts and all their payload delivery procedures. But then again, its a russian cockpit. You'll find a switch for everything and not necessarily where you are looking for it. If you are familiar with russian high fidelity modules (there are not that many) you will no doubt recognize many things in the cockpit of the Fulcrum that lets say the Blackshark features as well. You may even feel right at home. You may definitely not suffer from minimal pair problems like the guys who try to master the F-16C and the A-10CII at the same time getting nuts about what a DMS button push left long/short actually executes in those modules - depending on the current SOI. I simply believe that for what the Fulcrum is capable of on the outside, she brings a lot of switches and conditions and procedures to adhere to. If you are a Warthog pilot content to operate 8 switches or so in a specific manner to drop one dumb bomb CCRP on a tank, thats fine. If memory serves, the M2k takes only 4 to do that of which the first one is Master Arm ON and the last one is Consent to release? There was a reason why the M2k was a popular jet.

Being of the russian/soviet variety, one has some inherent difficulties to overcome when compared to western models most of us are used to. Basic things such as units, the availability and layout of cockpit controls and in more general terms, the installed equipment supporting solely the soviet doctrine of aerial warfare are quite different. So a fair comparison is not an easy thing to do. My suspicion being that it is meant to replace the M2k eventually and compared to the Mirage I find the Mig way more challenging to learn. But then again, the Mirage was build around the idea of an easy and flat UI with only a few knobs and controls to operate in order to make things happen the right way. Thats not my impression of the Mig. Russian/soviet design choices do not seem particularly user friendly across the DCS board. Speaking of leverages to work 20+ switches on startup or such things. So yeah, you may be in for a treat.

Its simply an ED version of / replacement for the phased out M2k-C. Because of that maybe thrown out too early for EA. Just look at the loadout. It is not meant to take on DCS's F14/16/18.

Flood lights?

Searched the forum for this one but came up empty. Also not sure if this is a bug or even if this is the right place to post it, the implementation of weapons being an ED responsibility afaik. It occured to me, that the Stingers on the Kiowa are capable of locking on ground targets (by tone and boxing them in the PDU) but do not guide after launch but overshoot them (mostly big time). But then again it could be pilot error by launching them too close. As this is obviously not the intended use of this WS, I wondered if somebody here knows more about this behavior.

Just to make sure: downloaded size != update size

I keep hearing that mantra over and over again, it almost sounds like an urban legend.

The crucial thing is that they were all different. There was no single standardized water tower as the map suggests. Especially not in East and West.

Yeah, my mistake, confused it with the Hochmoselbrücke.

... as it was build, finished and opened for traffic in 2019. The whole highway E42 as depicted in the map did not exist during the 80s. Maybe that saves some space available for other things.

No prob. Personally, I would applaud a glider mod for DCS, but Im afraid the core would not support the finer details of it like moving air masses, judging from the current behavior of wake turbulences staying in place and such things.

Those air race cones esp. feel out of place when located in the Rhine as that is a densely trafficked waterway with ships and barges passing by both ways every minute. Ludwigshafen/BASF would be furious if their replenishment was blocked by some guys in fancy aircrafts flying low around Koblenz. Which takes me at surprise are those strange little details added to the map without any need to do so while breaking the immersion of what Germany looked like. Who on earth would raise an captive hot air balloon some 100 ft above the ground to stay there? Thats what they did in WWI to block gun runs. I strongly hope they will disappear with the next update along with those cones, windmills and inflationary water towers. One would think that Ugra had some advisors and lots of source material available to prevent those mishaps during design.

The two major problems with castles (and with almost all german monumental landmarks for that matter) are: they are all unique and there are so many of them. Its kind of an uncanny valley to see a known landscape representing itself just nearly like the real deal.

The whole Middle Rhine Valley suffers by this neglect.

I suspect, these are relics of an automated conversion process of sat images to ground textures. My home town is missing as well. But at the correct location you find brown lines and rectangles in the green accurately defining the actual streets and buildings.

Its not. Thats the core of the problem. If it would be repetitive, you would recognize it at once and could simply say "Ah, thats not my region, thats a placeholder they will improve on it." Instead it could be and looks like the real thing. But you know it isnt, because you know the real thing for sure, because you live in it. It breaks the immersion on a much deeper level if it looks like it could be, but you know it isnt.

I suspect, the reason the Autobahn was modelled with street lighting was the relative absence of performance hungry cars / traffic. Otherwise, you would not recognize them at night. Also observing the countryside these days, I realized that the "size" of forests on the map is very much caused by its monoton green. In RL, forest areas show multiple shades of green because of different types of trees. That breaks monotony and large areas of forests into smaller ones. We all know and do compare to the real thing. But then again, Ugra should have been aware of that in the first place.

The aeronautical charts used by the A-10 and Gazelle at least are modern RL based and dont reflect the state of the map.

The whole Mosel valley from Koblenz up to Trier is devoid of its settlements. The slopes of the valley are simply left green or show forests instead of vineyards and cramped villages stuffed into the small spaces between the steep flanks of rock and the river. One could wonder why there is a road following down the riverline. No Traben-Trarbach / Mont Royal Kaserne, no Cochem and as a result no historical landmarks of the region like the Marksburg:

The highway bridge of A61 is definitely not of the cold war era. The other stuff most certainly is. For the Koblenz region, the Fernmeldeturm Koblenz would be a nice landmark to have as well.

Ok, lets start: Please remove those greenish, rusty, american style metal, elevated water towers. Far too many and too middle-west american. Furthermore, I really dont think that GDR and FRG used the same manufacturer of those . Scale those churches down. You may find churches with more than one belltower in big cities as center of an episcopal see perhaps - not in 08/15 villages in the woods far away from any major city. Same goes for industrial centers esp. with those high chimneys smoking in the middle of nowhere. Where do all the people live who work there? In the woods?? You will not find that many windmills in the netherlands, let alone germany. On the other hand, there are important landmarks (for an aviator at least) you didnt include, but which (at least to my understanding) could easily represented just by one or two instances of their class: e.g. "Fernmeldetürme", castles and so on. And at last, but I understand that this is something of a performance bottleneck: the map is not as densely populated as it should be. This is just my impression of 1 hour flying the Rhine and Moselle from Spangdahlem to Koblenz and South: nicely done forests, green land everywhere .... and no villages. The whole rhine valley from Koblenz down.... empty. Since the middle ages that region was a centerpoint of political struggles with commerce prospering through shipping and agriculture and it shows until today. The rhein castles are known since romanticism. The whole moselle valley is lined by vineyards - and the families of those winemakers formed wealthy communitites and villages at the border of the river from Trier up to Koblenz. But no vineyards there.