Kuky

Thanks for the tip however I don't see mirrors resolution an issue for me as now with new MiG-29A module mirrors look good even at 1024 settings but just for the heck of it I will try this out also

Please see attached track (and screenshots) where I am engaging an F-14 with R-27ER, I select B Radar Mode (High PRF) for high rate closing targets and radar keeps lock until missile impact, I fired the second R-27ER (just for heck of it, as target was already hit) and after the F-14 crashes into the ground, and radar lock is dropped, I notice on HUD that TDC is long, representing the D (Low PRF) receding targets radar mode and not the one I had selected on weapons panel. Incorrect Radar PRF Mode after loosing lock.trk

Eh... not all landings are good, especially when after engagement you end up with 1 damaged engine and then you're trying to land on very short runway, adding to problems drag chute when released rips off on release which does not help with breaking and stopping the airplane

soooo.... will this get support for MiG-29A Fulcrum module any time soon, or any time at all?

Yes, track replay is indeed broken so no use of them ATM, however you can see in screenshot where I was shooting at, the cannon aim and where the tracers went... the cannon computation is completely off for the MiG-29 right now. I can't use aiming and firing at non-manoeuvring target as judgement for accuracy (not that on its own) and even then I find that aim is off a bit and cannon rounds overshoot over the target so I have to aim at the bottom of the target in order to get hits. The cannon should be accurate and not this bad (for example look at accuracy of aiming piper in the F-15C... that thing is like a sniper, compared to it MiG-29 is like shotting with a bow and arrow.

Cannon aim is definitely off, here is a track that shows it clearly In screenshots, the two labelled as '1st Aim and Shoot A/B' show cannon aim reticule very off to the right of the F-15C but the tracers/bullets go very far off to the left of the F-15C And in screenshots labelled as '2nd Aim and Shoot A/B' I aim to the front of the F-15C and some bullets hit the back of it (and I score some hits) So clearly there is big discrepancy in aim reticule of the cannon on the MiG-29 and this is definitely a bug MiG-29 Fulcrum-A Cannon Aim Innacuracy.trk

Oh, its been reported already... good (but looks like we'll need to wait for this to be changed for a while) Thanks

Just remembered that also this could be due to monitor features like Gaming HDR and some other enhancements, which my monitor has too, all of which I disabled because it was giving me inconsistency in image brightness, something like a flicker, so maybe if you have monitor that has these features try turning it all off.

Hm, maybe you have bit of hardware issue (video card or monitor, maybe even the cable between the 2)? On something slightly different, my dcs runs pretty smooth but yesterday I was setting up VoiceAttack so I set dcs to non full screen, smaller than monitor native resolution, and after switching back and forth between the applications I noticed dcs getting very stuttery even while I had vsync 120 fps which was weird, I thought maybe because I had 4 Mig-29a in the mission it overwhelmed my video card but turns out it didn't, I restarted the pc and after that it was smooth again in the same mission. So I don't know, maybe theres bit of memory leak or something when dcs switches from one view to another as it did with me switching from dcs to VoiceAttack? Maybe try a different cable first, I'd also check if possibly video card is running too hot, running out of vram... anything like that... even changing settings in dcs... computers can have tons of things causing issues and most of us here know this. Good luck in finding what causes it

Me too

I think pilots and parachutes should be exempt from units for which black dots are drawn from longer distances because not only are humans not visible from that far out (but large parachutes are) they are first drawn as 1 dot then 2 separate dots (1 pilot 1 parachute) and they are represented same as aircraft for which they are often misidentified (because in DCS that far out they look the same as aircraft, black dot is a black dot right?, but in real life they don't). So I think it would be better not to show them as dots at all, instead just show the normal 3d model?

Stumbled on another (smaller) terrain elevation glitch

Actually he sure can (when dealing with real people) which should be simulated by having this type of command.

VAICOM huh... I'll have a loot at it at some point. Thanks.

I love this aircraft

I have VoiceAttack already, I had it setup (for most important things) for when I flew Russian FC3 aircraft but its not 100% safe/proof to use all the time, sometimes it doesn't recognise my commands, maybe due to my accent or whatever, sometimes command menu changes depending on what's happening in the mission... also takes lot of time to remember all the voice commands. So right now I switched to using buttons on my stick and MiG-29 Fulcrum being WIP still I leave things be for now as I'm expecting things to change over time and just slowly learning the new module, how everything works, what is not working properly, etc. Also, while talking about me expecting things to change, right now there is no "attack my target" command with MiG-29 Fulcrum module (and I wonder why they left it out?)

I programmed my stick to use a button and 1 HAT switch to open, navigate and sellect communication commands also, which is why I ask for this, I ordered VR headset also so having this on the stick is handy. Over time I might just move to voice activation software but that one is more tricky to setup.

See screenshot showing location of these terrain "bumps" on the taxiway By the way, I love the winter season on this map best for flying up high over the mountain ranges

It is a bit off... when level (no pulling G's) it overshoots a bit, aims tad ahead of the target... but when in turn (pulling higher G's) it undershoots (see my screenshot, looks like good aim but you can see tracers going way behind the aircraft. I figured out why often I see tracers going to the left of the target, its because the aircraft pulls to the left as you start firing that cannon, so I figured I have to aim to the right side of the aircraft instead of the center.

I have noticed that when I try to use the cannon while target is locked with either radar or IRST and I think I have good aim (piper is on the target) and I fire, it misses most times. So this morning I tried few dogfight quick missions against few different aircraft and I am getting the impression that aiming piper aims little ahead and to the left of the target, when I am directly behind the aircraft and the target aircraft just flies straight, and its very close (only few 100m in front of me) the rounds go over the aircraft so I need to aim little lower and to the right and then rounds come right on target. Anyone else noticing the same? ps: I also noticed when firing the cannot that it pulls the airframe to the left... which is nice feature of the FM physics.

By them being merged together I meant that as both 50 & 90 sectors feed into same receptor then I'd expect both 50 & 90 sectors on RWR to light up at the same time, which is what they do when range is very short. Because they do not do so it implies to me that somehow these 2 sectors are somehow still separated? So all this makes no sense to me.

Alright, so if the 2 sectors (50 & 90) are merged due to reduction of channels, that still doesn't explain why the 90 deg light doesn't come on (until what I tested to be around only ~5.5Km). If the two are merged then they should both light up at the same time, right?

For aircraft that is primarily an A2A fighter/interceptor command for wingman (and flight) to engage bandits should be on top of the commands list, not last, because it is of most importance (esp when reaction time needs to be fast). Please change this. Also, Please add command for wingman & flight to Turn Radar ON and OFF, this is a must have IMHO but its currently lacking. If you don't have space for another command, then remove the Engage Infantry option as you can't even see infantry from the air in MiG-29A.

First of all, I repeat again that by balance I am referring to having ALL systems of ALL aircraft modelled by same standards, meaning if MiG-29A RWR is modelled with flaws, then all other aircraft need to be done the same (but they are not), not to mention the flaws put into this RWR are put as the way the system was designed to function by default, and this is just wrong, I don't care what you believe in, I have noticed that you have that typical western bias against Russian/Soviet (and I think I am safe to assume Chinese also) anything, and second because of this you don't seem to add anything valuable with your comments.

Actually you are wrong on this, in fact when it comes to both a game and realism, ED should in fact strive towards balance, and balance not meaning to make every jet working the same, but making a standard across all modules in terms of modelling of FM, avionics, damage, weapons etc... and not have one module done this way, while others the other way. Doing so IMHO just creates BIAS and away from realism, because realism doesn't just mean one thing being done realistically, while others which it is interacting with, are not. PS: I for one, do not accept that SPO-15 was done properly as I just can't believe Russian engineers would have designed this system this way. To model the system to always have some possible issues due to maintenance etc as if it was designed to work this way all the time, is just wrong and it seems this is how MiG-19A RWR has been modelled which is not alright.