xxJohnxx

I did quit some testing with a couple of programs. Back when only running one monitor I tested OBS, ShadowPlay, Fraps and DxTory. During the benchmarks I did, DxTory got the best results on my rig. Fraps, OBS and ShadowPlay all had a similar drop off, the one of DxTory was a bit lower though. Both OBS and ShadowPlay unfortunately lacked in other areas as well. For example recording different devices onto different audio tracks was not possible, which was a bit of a problem during editing. (Not sure if that changed in more recent versions of both programs though). So, personally I am quit happy with DxTory in most of the games I record. Depending on your system specs you might get different results with other software applications though. EDIT: DxTory works quit well on a Nvidia Surround setup. You can decide how large the area is you want to record fairly easily.

Hehe. So drüber nachgedacht gibt es hier in der Umgebung recht viel an ausgedientem Flugmaterial das teilweise im Privatbesitz herumsteht. Vom UH-1D, der mitten in der Stadt auf dem Dach eines Hauses steht bis zu Mi-8 und diverse MiGs und anders Fluggerät das teilweise sogar Innenhöfe von Firmen ziert. :pilotfly:

Naja, wenigstens die Richtung stimmte :D :thumbup:

Thank you Bassly for the write up! Good work! Just keep in mind that the radar is pitch and bank angle stabilized 30° in all directions. That means that the radar will keep level and at a constant pitch to the horizon as long as you don't exceed pitch or bank values.

Thanks for creating! That indeed is very useful! EDIT: Would maybe also be helpful to have the PRMG station of each airfield.

Hi, I am by no means an expert in the topic and I just finished my first water cooling build a week ago. But let me give you one advice: Include as many quick disconnects into your build as you can. If you have the money for it (I know they are very expensive) try to have everything disconnect by quick disconnects. I tried to keep the costs down and only ordered 4 of them (2 for the CPU cooling block and 2 for the GPU bridge) and after only one week of use I am kinda regretting not buying 4 more and at least have the pumps being connected to quick disconnects as well. Background: I modded both my water pumps (from plastic to metal case) and as a result after about a week one of the two pumps is leaking just a tiny amount of liquid (just barley enough to keep the rubber pad it is standing on moist). Now to get that pump fixed I would have to drain my whole system, remove the pump while there might still be some liquid left (that will foreseeably create a mess), fix the pump, hook it up again and refill the system again. If I had quick disconnects in place it would be an easy solution. Disconnect the pump, fix it and reconnect it. Have fun with the system! Be careful while filling it though. Mine leaked at the weirdest places initially. :pilotfly:

Huch, dann bin ich ja schon ein paar mal im Anflug und Abflug auf/von Leutkirch über dich drübergeflogen. :pilotfly: Hattet ihr nicht einen Bauern der ne MiG-21 (?) auf seinem Vorplatz hat? Oder war das schon in Bad Wurzach?

Hi, Reading in this thread I decided to do some more research. While doing so with Google and other search engines becomes more difficult every day (because a lot of the hits are threads within this forum :D) I found some interesting documents. This one talks quit detailed about the history off the MiG-21 and also mentions some technical details. There a couple of interesting parts in there regarding this discussion: In a paragraph about the Ye-2, the early technology and aerodynamics test-bed: Well, this was the requirement, let's see what was included in the actual production aircraft: In a paragraph about the MiG-21F-13: The MiG-21F-13 was quit an early series produced model, how about later ones? Let's have a look at the MiG-21S: In a paragraph about the MiG-21S: This was true for the MiG-21S with the RP-22 radar (the same as in the MiG-21Bis) and the ASP-PF-21 (the MiG-21Bis has the updated ASP-PFD-21 gunsight). I am not entirely sure how true the contend of the quoted document is, but it seems reasonable well put together at least. I unfortunately don't have the technical manuals available for the Bis where the said functions would probably be described (neither will they be written in a language I can comprehend), so it is quit hard to confirm those claims made in the document. However, similar information can be found at various locations in the net, so might be not entirely wrong. However, questions do arise how the range finding is done within the minimum range of 500m with the RP-22 radar. Too little data to 100% anything on that subject either, unfortunately.

Maybe not a MiG (really not even close) but might show the point: Source: http://www.airliners.net/photo/FedEx---Federal/McDonnell-Douglas-MD-11%28F%29/1801406/ This majestic MD-11 took a turn a bit too wide. Turned out the MD-11 could also be used as plough. BTT: While the MiG-21 is considerably lighter, the point, as some have mentioned already is still there: The wheel contact surfaces of jet aircraft are usually very small compared to the weight on them. But also the ground itself plays a major factor itself: During or up to a week after heavy rainfall grass surfaces can be very soft, especially non-prepared ones. Also the grass length can play a major factor in wheel drag on grass. During my flight training I managed to get myself stuck in grass in a light aircraft that was not heavier than 500kg (including fuel and myself). There was no chance to get that small bird unstuck with engine power. Only after getting out and pulling it by hand could get it out of the whole it sank into. In the end I would say that the grass friction in DCS comes close to a non-prepared surface (which the grass areas between the run- and taxiways are) with soft soil and maybe recent rainfalls.

:thumbup: Thanks for your continues work too improve the MiG even further!!

3. There are a couple of methods you can use to figure out the remaining fuel and reset the gauge accordingly. Let's assume we have 3 tanks loaded. The 900L central and one 450L wing tank on each side. When you drop your wing tanks when your fuel level is 4100L, your new fuel level will be 3900L, as only the internal (3000L) and the central 900L tank remains. When you drop your wing tanks and your central tank with 4100L remaining, your new fuel level will be 3000L (only internal). If you have less then 3000Lremaining when dropping tanks you will have to use the indicator lights. Have a look at the manual, there the diffrent levels are described.

Can you show us a track please? I can only guess that the cover for the "dispense flare" switch might be closed, but a track would provide further research analysis.

I am not entirely sure if it is real or not (though looks quit real to me), but I am pretty sure that this isn't from DCS. If it is fake, it might be rendered some way else, but I am sure it is not from DCS. EDIT: Also wondering how some conclude that the IR signature of the after-burning aircraft is wrong. At 2:01 the afterburner look like the hottest thing on the bird. Else is shown as not so hot or cold. As you would expect.

That might be related to camera lensflare though.

The corner is not gone, just dirty.

The Kh-66 is its whole own discussion point as it is a two bladed sword. The most realistic option would be not having Grom at all, because the Bis couldn't guide it. However, as with a couple of points made in the ongoing of this discussion, I personally like that LNS deviated from reality a bit and brought us the Grom. While it maybe is not 100% realistic to have it, it is still worth it in my opinion.

Thanks for that hint. While it was not directly aimed at me, I gave adjusting the screen res a try and changed it from 1024 to than 1024 every frame. That fixed the problem I had with the mirrors flickering and showing triangle mesh. Can't give you any rep currently. Thanks anyway! :thumbup:

Well, if this isn't enough proof, let me quote another manual then: Note: LP = Low pressure = RPM1 HP = High pressure = RPM2

Quote from the manual:

Okay, thanks for pointing that out. Didn't know that!

Yes, I know the single NDB approach you are talking about. That's also what I meant here: They were indeed quit common here in central Europe as well, though nowadays they mostly lost their importance. Quit hard to come by non-commercial airframes with dual ADFs as well. However, the classical NDB approach in Russia is flown with dual NDBs and dual ADFs. An example here: The D and DJ NDBs server as your dual NDBs while at the same time being the outer and middle marker. Decision height is at 135 meters for that NDB approach.

Vref? Shouldn't that be V1? At least in commercial aviation V1 is the maximum speed you can reject a take-off at (for critical failures only), Vr is the speed you rotate, and given that you have two engines, V2 is the minimum speed you have to have to safely continue on one engine in the case the other one fails. Vref, again in commercial aviation, is the approach reference speed, which you fly during approach until just before touchdown.

The manual suggests that you have to have visual on the runway (or the approach lights) at 300m AGL. Not sure about the different minimums in wartime, but might be plausible. Everything is different in wartime... I guess a reason for that is, that the Bis only has one receiver. On a proper NDB approach you want to employ two ground stations simultaneously. The stations would be aligned with the runway course. During approach you would just make sure both needles (of each ADF) overlap. If they loose alignment from each other you know that you have deviated to either the left or right. With only one receiver this is not possible in that way. You still can do it by setting the station and then flying the exact curse, but it is more difficult and less accurate. Also, during a proper NDB approach, you would have to manually monitor altitude and distance to the airfield, to make sure you end up in the right position for approach. The instrumentation does not easily allow for this and being alone in the cockpit doesn't help either.

I would recommending having a look at this tutorial video: It shows how to land pretty precisely.

Okay. I will take a look at that later then. Thanks for the feedback!