xxJohnxx

Well it is a bug that it is not affected by the corresponding menu option...

While that list is plausible, in my opinion it has a bit of a shortcoming. All the fans they could create with the Mig-21 for Russian air foils will go out empty. Instead they have two prop aircraft from around the same era. I personally still believe (or at least hope) that instead of either the F6F or the J2F, they will bring us another MiG.

Probably not. As it was mentioned at the start of this thread, that nearly everyone will be pleased with at least one module. This indicates that each of the three modules probably will fill a different roll and possibly also era. I don't want to say that they won't produce a WWII era prop, but if they do, the other two aircraft will be something else. I don't think they could satisfy most of their customers otherwise.

It probably should be possible to set this with the "Option->Misc->Show Pilot Body in Cockpit" However, it isn't. This was probably overlooked by Belsimtek.

Hi, I have personally flown most of my civil-simulator-time in FSX, so I won't be able to help you out with X-Plane. Let's start with VFR. Scenery: - https://www.fullterrain.com/ or otherwise known as Orbx. These are the guys you want to be buying when you want realistic scenery, where you can use actually maps to navigate. They offer a couple of products: FTX Global -> More of a world-wide improvement, often using automatic generation tools to place building. Improves the default scenery, however is not as detailed as their other products. FTX terrain regions -> Small patches of land (often still quit big) with very high detail, improved airports (not to an really advanced level, but much better than default). The scenery looks very realistic, most of the details are hand placed. Airports -> For each of their scenery regions they have AddOn airports, that take the improved airports even further, to a very high level. Moving cars, people and animals add some life to the whole thing. Check out their demos as well, they will give you an impression of their work. Airports: This is quit difficult, because you normally don't really buy airports by the manufacturer but by the location (if that makes sense). However, the airports sold by publisher Aerosoft (http://aerosoft.com/) are normally a safe choice. If you find some airport on there you are interested in, Google for Reviews, just to make sure. Aircraft: Now, a lot of companies sell General Aviation aircraft for FSX. Most of them produce decent stuff, some of them better stuff, and few of those awesome stuff. Generally I can recommend these companies: - http://a2asimulations.com/ They sell you a product in two pieces. The base module and the AccuSim module. The base module is nice, but if you want realism, you want to buy the AccuSim as well. All of their products are top-notch, the quality is perfect and it probably won't get more realistic than this. - http://www.realairsimulations.com/ Their DukeB60V2, TurbinDuke and the Lancair Legacy are safe bets as well. They are a bit faster though, and especially with the TurbineDuke, you will be cruising pretty high up. The Lancair Legacy is a low to medium altitude prop and ideal if you want to look at fancy terrain at speed. Their products are very nice, however they are not as realistic as the products of A2A simulations. Nothing is. - Aerosoft Yes, those guys again. Aerosoft also publishes aircraft. Here you have to be a bit more careful though. Some of them are at A2A level (for example the DA-20), others are not. Reading the reviews is a key factor to know what exactly you will get. That's all for now. If you need any more information, let me know! Best regards, John

Ahh, I see. Yeah, that's something I am not to sure about either.

I am not entirely sure, but the main brakes on the wheels are definitely pneumatic. It would be quit strange to have a second, hydraulic brake on the wheels, just for that purpose.

I gave it a try and I actually see what you mean. I normally never use the heading stabilization, therfore I didn't really experience the problem you were getting. But, yes the pedal deflection by the system can become a problem. Thanks! ;)

Why would you start your APU again on shutdown? Just run the regerse procedure as you do on startup, but leave the APU away.

Why would you not use the trim on the pedals? In the real bird, the pedals are bound to the trim system as well.

Yes, the emergency afterburner has a switch just infront of the thrust levers. I am not sure what afterburner the AI is using, but I think the different shape is just because the AI uses the default afterburner effect, while the player controlled aircraft does use a custom effect. The AI however generally outpowers the actual flyable aircraft in nearly every module.

What's wrong with those?

I agree the Lazur equipment would be very nice to have. However it seems to be quit complex. While it only features a couple of controls and indicators in the cockpit it probably requires a lot of background work to make the actual guidance happening. For example, the Lazur system guides you to your target and once close allings you to the target parameters (altitude, speed, etc.). Having the actual simulation providing you with that guidance information is probably quit a programming task. I don't want to say it is impossible, very similar things have already been done (normally by much bigger teams though), but it is probably a lot of work. An example for a quit similar application is the ATC in FSX. While it is not exactly the same, giving vectors to the player's aircraft to get from cruise altitude to the runway (often including several steps, turns, etc) in the end, is probably similar to what the Lazur would to. However, anyone who has ever flown with the FSX ATC probably knows that while it often gets you to your destination it also often just doesn't work. In the end, with both the Lazur or the ATC, it would be converting human intelligence into AI, which is difficult, and therefore probably unlikely to happen. A nice thing though would be to have the Lazur system aboard the simulated aircraft, but without any built-in guiding AI. Instead it would be nice to have an API that allows skilled programmers (as this community seems to have) to find solutions to the problems given. It would even allow for human Lazur System Ground Controllers (or however those guys are called). Together with programs like LotATC it could be quit interesting to have an actual person send out data link commands to several MiG-21s (and maybe future MiG-2x versions that also have data link possibility) in an MP session.

Welcome to the forums! I am not entierly sure about the exact problem you are getting. Just let me clarify, you want to run a non-Steam MiG-21 on Steam DCS World? If that is the case, I have one advise for you: Save yourselfe the trubble and download non-Steam DCS World and run everything on there. The modules you bought through Steam will still run on non-Steam DCS World.

The PRMG system (comparable to the western ILS) can automatically detect from which runway side you are flying to the approach (which is different to the ILS where you have to set the runway/approach course yourself). Whenever you are closer than 25km to the PRMG ground station you selected and you are within ±45° of the runway heading the PRMG system will automatically set the correct course. If you would like to perform an RSBN or NDB approach the runway heading/ approach course is important though. Yes, there indeed is a list for the runway headings. You can find it in DCS World\Doc\Charts\DCS_GND_Charts.pdf. The airport with the RSBN / PRMG preset number should be Mozdok, which can be found on page 34 of that DCS_GND_Charts.pdf. As you can see on the airport diagram, there are numbers on each end of the runway. Runway 08 has a heading of 076° and runway 26 a heading of 256°. Alternatively you can find the same charts in the kneeboard which you can access with RCtrl + Up. RCtrl + Left or RCtrl + Right to cycle between the pages. Small tip: If you don't need the precise approach courses/runway headings, you can figure out the course/heading by looking at the runway number. Runway 08 will have a heading of around 80°. Runway 26 will have a heading of around 260°. This method should be more than sufficient to easily get runway headings on everyday flying. Best regards, John

I am very interested to find on what they are working on next. Personally, I would prefer if they continued on the Russian path and produced the successors of the MiG-21, like the MiG-23 and MiG-25. However, given how many hints we got, the F-14 indeed is very likely to be their next release. While this is not really an aircraft I am interested in, I still look forward to see how perfect they will be able to recreate it. If they can keep the bar they raised with the MiG-21 up, I have no doubts that it will be awesome.

Doesn't seem like the modelled MiG-21 had any beacon nor strobe lights.

Hi, As requested, the NDB navigation tutorial: Best regards, John

Hi, I was doing some testing with the MiG-21, including spending a couple of minutes in the "Active Pause" mode of DCS. It seems that once you have been in "Active Pause" mode for a couple of minutes, the pilot will start to get hypoxia effects though the Pilot O2 level gauge shows around 120 kg/cm². This happens if you stay in "Active Pause" or if you continue to fly around. The attached track shows this behaviour. Not a serious problem, just would be nice if it could be fixed! :) Best regards, John MiG-21OxygenAirborneStartHypoxia.trk

This seems like a graphical bug indeed. Did you try to repair DCS? Maybe some files got corrupted. Could also be your graphics hardware. What hardware do you use and are you updated to current drivers?

Thanks for all the feedback! Really appreciated! A NDB tutorial is in the works, hoping to upload it tomorrow.

Yeah anything reflective should do. You might give tinfoil a try. However, as far as I know the positions and distances between the three reflectors are important, so you might want to look for accurate measurements before you start building yourself a replacement. I don't have mine around, else I could provide you with the necessary information. Maybe someone else can do that though.

Okay got you. Thanks for clarifying!

Hi, I think you are misunderstanding something here. When you put the gear-lever in the UP position, the gear-brakes will apply to stop the wheels from spinning*. The brakes use compressed air. Therefore, if you leave the gear-lever in the UP position, you will lose compressed air -> Bad Solution: You put the lever in the MIDDLE position, where the brakes won't be applied any longer. If you put the gear lever in the DOWN position, the system doesn't automatically apply brakes, so you won't consume any compressed air. *The reasons for that can be various. On one hand, rotating wheels will introduce vibrations (quit strong vibrations). On the other hand you probably don't want a wheel rotating at ~270km/h being pressed against the gear bay or the landing gear doors.

Correct.