artao

I notice the positive response as well. Encouraging on that level, regarding user-interest. The navigation is also in dire need of updating, so add that as a 3rd need along with FM and sound. Regarding sound, someone HAS made a sound mod (2022) that IMO is pretty decent. It does go into the base directory, but is easy to turn into a mod -- I use JSGME. Also, it does pass IC (last I looked) >> https://www.digitalcombatsimulator.com/en/files/3326441/ We'd need an earlier MiG-21 model and F-4 model. I don't think the F-4E ever went up agains the MiG-21bis. I may well be mistaken. Perhaps even likely. I'm just being silly now tho. Close enough is close enough.

!! THANK YOU !! for taking this upon yourselves, you and your team. ED/Magnitude damn well better allow it to pass IC, since Mag3 won't do it themselves and it's pretty essential for "realistic" navigation in the Fishbed. So irritating that it's seemingly abandoned. <sigh> Question: So we have to re-edit files with every update, orrrrr .... Not entirely certain what all needs to be done after an update. I'm hoping it's possible to make a simple JSGME mod to enable after every update. That's what I do with all other mods that go in the base install directory and it works great.

Finally finished mission 1. And overall it went pretty smooth, tho I'm lucky I didn't crash or rip the rotors off on one landing attempt. Please don't take me as complaining previously. I've been playing almost nothing but the first mission, trying to come to terms with the new (more powerful engined) flight model. I think I'm getting a grip on it at last. Despite simply being a series of landings, I found mission 1 VERY engaging and completing it very very satisfying. I spent hours in VR trying to nail it, over and over and over. I most DEFINITELY learned how important it is to dust off and go around for another try if a landing isn't looking good or even just not "feeling right." Anyhow, thanks. Also thanks for encouraging me to work with the new engine model.

Cool thanks. I am starting to come to terms with the new flight model. In no small part because I set a curve of 40 on my collective. MUCH finer control.

I'm trying to complete mission 1 and came very close finally. But I failed my landing at the hospital after picking up the troops. It really would help if there were a wind sock there, as judging wind direction is otherwise nigh impossible. The smoke from my crash indicated the wind is coming from a different direction than I thought. Regarding navigation. The mission screen notes and my commander keep tell me I can use FM homing to find FSB Berlin, but that does not appear to work. I am certain I have it set correctly. I'm not sure if this is a DCS issue or what. The commander also tells me I can use FM homing to find the troops that need extraction. So the freq. list has VHF, UHF, and FM. Is the VHF supposed to go in the VHF/AM comms radio or the VHF nav radio or both? I get confused as to what frequencies I'm supposed to use and why and in which situations. Or perhaps I need to use the ADF radio, I didn't try that. Not sure the needed freq. can even be entered into it tho. And then there's the cow in the middle of the LZ at FSB Berlin. While I appreciate the humor there .... Why? (and how?) ..... Surely the soldiers would get the cow out of there before I land. ..... Or perhaps I'm supposed to land on the pad; but its placement in relation to the smoke and flagpole makes that tricky at best.

Apparantly (I've not personally tried) the 19-rocket launchers work, just not the 7-rocket launchers.

Good point. You can't use 2nd stage burner above 6000m.

Above I claimed the MiG-21bis can accelerate vertically. I was wrong. Apologies. Altho it can have a T:W of 1.0 to 1.1 in A/A combat configuration, its drag characteristics will prohibit vertical acceleration and actually cause the airspeed to reduce. Along with this, the engine's primary feed tank's fuel pump wouldn't like that at all, and would fail to keep up with the maneuver and cause fuel starvation and flame out of the engine. Still, it can hold it's own for a short time in the vertical. The fuel system tho is probably the aircraft's biggest fault, as it's too easy to fuel-starve the engine during high-G (+ or - but especially -), vertical, and inverted maneuvers. ........ That and the lag in changing thrust. My bad.

Fair nuf. I shall try to get used to the new FM. I've been playing mission 1 with the old FM and it's been working, tho redlining is perhaps more of an issue. I have lit the engine on fire once LOL. Mostly tho I struggle with maintaining control in the winds when landing. In the new flight model I can barely take off let alone land. It irritates me and makes me feel like I've never (sim)flown a helo before.

I've found that many people aren't aware of this, so just spreading awareness. ED put an option in the Huey's FMOptions.lua to revert to the old flight model. And yes, it passes IC.

So the patch today didn't fix this? I've not yet tried using rockets since last week's patch, just doing cargo runs and crew extraction/insertion with guns. Seriously cripples the Huey. Paradise Lost you say? I just bought that two days ago and just started it yesterday. Good to know. Thanks. I'll stick with other campaigns (UN pilot) til this is fixed.

I think if several of these small devs joined forces things would get done a LOT faster. So many tiny dev teams, not uncommonly with overlapping bits and parts each of them have to spend time individually developing. Unlikely to happen tho. It seems everyone wants to do their own thing. I would pay a reasonable cost for a fix update for the current Balalaika while waiting to buy a new V2 .... some day. If only.

Great for you you've had it 10 years. Woo freakin hoo. I bought it last year. I'm a new user. Thankfully I bought it on sale. So what if YOU aren't interested in AAA games, that's 100% irrelevant to my point. RE: "Of course, I do expect support ... that does not mean that I expect an aircraft totally devoid of bugs." LMAO dude. Known bugs can be EXPECTED to be fixed. They have not been. Barely acknowledged even (AFAIK). RE: "To me it is not broken, I can fly it reasonably well, can you elaborate in what way it does impede your use of this aircraft?" Okay ... Go try to use RSBN/ARK on the Kola map, or Sinai map. NOPE! You have to hand edit files to manually add stuff, and it's still not the actual available nav beacons available to ALL aircraft now in DCS maps; the MiG-21bis can't access those. When the MiG-21bis came out, there wasn't a universal RSBN system. Try to accelerate vertically with a clean plane; NOPE! But with 2nd stage afterbuner of 97k newtons, it should have greater than 1:1 thrust-to-weight ratio. i.e. - It should be able to sustain vertical flight, even with 4xRadar and 2xIR missiles. Good grief man!! Have you NOT read the freakin bug reports and complaints in this very forum? The flight model is broken, it can't use the RSBN/ARK that exists in each map; it ONLY has the pre-programmed hard coded RSBN/ARK channels. Users have to make modified .lua files to add navigation stations. Even if the dev of the map adds them themselves, the MiG-21bis can not use them. As to INS ... uhhhhh .... You've had it 10 years and don't realize it has pretty much that? It can fly itself back to base and take it in along the proper glide path, then give you control at the final moments to complete the landing. That's kinda better than INS really. Except it doesn't work right. (Or at least I can't get it to work right. Could well be user-error, but I've tried very hard.) The engine is underpowered. The "tail wag" at certain speeds/attitudes isn't realistic. The radar is janky and not at all remotely a radar as most planes in DCS now have. The IFF is "faked." The "beam riding" missile is more like laser-guided. more ....... Are you being willfully ignorant of all these issues? There's others I haven't gone into. They have made their money. As you said, it's been on sale at least 10 years. With over 10 yrs of sales, it must have significant profits for ED. As to your polls, so what? A poll of a fraction of DCS users. Woo hoo. All the poll says is that 32% of the people that responded to the poll have the MiG-21bis. What if any bias is there in the poll? Are there other polls? What are the actual sales states? We won't know as they won't (rightfully so) release those figures, I'm sure. So I base my assumption on how many users talk about the MiG-21bis. It seems quite popular, tho many people don't much fly it anymore cuz of its issues. Which are readily apparent. And assuming that just because they have Magnitude 3 as a company means they know how to run their business ... Uhh, no. Most people who own businesses have no idea how to run them. They have very little income currently, because they're not releasing anything. If they "knew how to run their business" they'd have stable profit along with actual PR. They're essentially modders, being a company is most likely just for legal reasons. And updating the MiG-21bis? Soooo .... They're secretly updating it in the background but not telling anyone about it in the release notes. Gotcha. ..... No. LMAO. How many years has the Corsair been in development now? How often do they update the community on progress? .... Rarely at best. .... Great for you that you have such faith in Magnitude 3, but what have they release AS Magnitude 3, not as Leatherneck? If they're not gonna do the MiG-21bis, they should say so and let it go. I know giving it to the community is a fantasy, I made that VERY apparent in my comment. It is broken in many ways, and should not be sold at full price. I thought I was getting an accurate simulation, and in many ways it is. But many many ways not. I still fly it cuz I love the plane, but I hold a good amount of suspension of disbelief while doing so. As to, "How easy it is to demand other people to relinquish the rights to the software they have created ... have you gifted your own work so easily before?" Yes. I regularly release work (music, digital images) as CC0, as well as free to download by copyright protected.

Yeah. ..... <sigh> Yeah. Perhaps the best thing that could happen is another dev. decides to do a MiG-21. ... perhaps -21F even, or multiple variants. I wish I was still new to the plane and didn't know about its faults. I still enjoy flying it, but get frustrated.

What do you think, could it be effective? They kinda seem like they're doing what THEY want to do without considerating what the market wants. Prioritizing aircraft THEY would like to see rather than those with demonstrated commercial success. I would put big money on a bet that more people want the MiG-21 updated than want anything else they have in their pipeline. Just a thought. Cuz otherwise we won't be seeing any MiG-21 updates for AT LEAST 4 yrs at the most optimisic, and that's simply unacceptable. They're a commercial entity, not simply "modders," and many many people have invested in their products. Support is expected; how long is a question, sure. THIS is egregious tho. Nothing to be expected for at least 4yrs as a kind estimate, considering the dev pace of the Corsair. I mean, buy it new now and you pay 60usd. That's the price of a full AAA game. But then you buy it and find out it lacks in numerous areas. Then you get peeved; and rightfully so. .... I bought it on sale, so I'm not as peeved, but still. I expected moar realerer. If they're gonna sell it "as-is" the cost should be reduced to like 30 or 40usd. It's just THAT out of date and broken. (Tho still fun -- in part due to how broken it is) Perhaps even a petition to release the current version to public domain as they work thru their personal list of "wanted aircraft" and then let them make a v2 we can pay for. (ahhh. dreams be dreams eh ) The lack of support for the MiG-21bis is egregiously unacceptable, especially considering how important an aircraft it is. It's basically the AK-47 of fighter aircraft. One can not talk about the Cold War air combat landscape without acknowledging its significant impact and widespread use. The MiG-21bis represents a crucial piece of military aviation history, and its inadequately updated status undermines the historical and technical integrity of simulations that aim to represent that era accurately. It's the most-produced fighter aircraft in history, with the longest run of usage. And surely it's one of the most popular DCS modules, no? I have no stats, but it's gotta be top 5. And I'm curious how much money in totum it has made. Surely, again, in the top 5. It should be priority number one. It's one of the oldest modules but has CLEAR issues, from the flight model and its low-speed handling to the underpowered engine -- which SHOULD put out like 97k Newtons of thrust with 2nd stage burner. Which, in some configurations like A/A missiles without tanks, would give greater than 1:1 thrust:weight ratio. Which is to say, if light enuf it should be able to handle the vertical fight just fine. Even just correct the flight model and engine performance and change the nav systems to what is now DCS-standard and perhaps deal with the radar, and we'd all be happy while they work on a V2. Which I'm sure we'll all happily pay for (as a discounted upgrade). HELL!! Even a low-cost 1.5 update!! I'd pay 10 to 20usd for that.

Okay, much better now. With my curves adjusted right and FFB forces set right and the old flight model, I'm back to feeling competent. Amazing how much settings can make a difference.

No axis conflicts, but DCS did reset my curves. Redoing them has helped. Also, disabling all the FFB forces and leaving only the force trim has helped a good deal too. ... When I first got FFB I immediately went from struggling to hover to being able to hold a reasonable hover. After re-tuning the FFB settings again, I'm about back to that. I so love it when DCS resets controls. <sigh>

Now granted, I haven't flown helo in a few months. But I used to be fairly proficient. NOW tho it's like I've never flown a helo before at all. For one thing I keep getting into unrecoverable VRS when coming in for a landing, around 50ft. It doesn't matter if I'm hovering or moving or how fast. Around 50 ft the helo just drops, and I can't apply enuf collective to recover. Also, has the option to use the old flight model been disabled? It's still in the FMOptions.lua, but I can't seem to tell a difference with it true or false anymore. Finally, the collective just seems ... wrong. I have to hold way more collective than I think I do, and kick more left pedal in; sometimes it feels like the pedals are doing nothing. It feels underpowered and sluggish to respond. DCS reset my control curves, but even fixing that hasn't made much difference. I've got an FFB stick too, and when I got it several months back the ease of hovering was incredible. Now I can't seem to stop drifting in one direction or another and have to overcompensate to slow down. Sure, I'm out of practice. But this just seems ridiculous. If it's just me it's just me and I'll get more hours in -- which I will anyhow.

OMG I want to kiss you! Thank you, it's all back. I'm very glad some people know the DCS files so well.

Thank you!! It worked!! However, all my campaign progress in Bear Trap is gone.

+1 Here as well. Just like everyone else, including the empty "available modules" list. (cross posted. I'm betting the threads will get merged anyhow)

+1 Here as well. Just like everyone else, including the empty "available modules" list. (cross posted. I'm betting the threads will get merged anyhow)

I kinda wish Magnitude 3 would delay the Corsair simply to apply needed updates to the MiG-21bis such as these navigation issues ... Actually that's all I can think of. Then after the Corsair work on a v2. Somehow I don't think many people would mind a delay on the Corsair in exchange for a MiG-21bis navigation update, but then I'm personally indifferent about the Corsair and very interested in the Balalaika. But that simply remains my wish, if only.

I like to use the pop-up kneeboard which is available in every aircraft. I make it small and put it directly in front of me. Then when needed I pop it up and spam the "mark my location" button to make my location and heading in relation to all the waypoint apparent and clearly defined; I find a single one doesn't always show up that well. The mssing thing with this method is you can only follow the waypoints and see the topography. No other flights nor, more importantly, any SAM/AAA information. I've taken to adding well-labeled waypoints on or near such sites (and Bullseye), then they show up on the kneeboard. But no radar/weaspon range information. It's a tradeoff. .. I mostly play in VR, so jumping to F10 and back can be a bit jarring; particularly how close the map is to my face (not adjustable without affecting cockpit position, sadly)

WOW did you misinterpret what I said. I mean it's a sad state of affairs when the players have to do something the devs should have already done. Not saying anything against or about people modding the game. It's a shame devs have made players so desperate for a fix they had to dive into the files and fix it themselves. Kudos to them for doing it; they shouldn't have had to. That's all I'm saying.