xxJohnxx

If something is changed, I would also like the possibility to keep the current method.

No, the SPRD-99s have to be jettisoned manually currently. However, this is not the problem that occurs. This shaking occurs quit a while after they have been jettisoned from the aircraft. The plum of smoke is just the engine, where on rapid throttle movements the fuel is not burn't properly, and therefore crating a smoke trail. The AI does this on several other airframes as well.

I guess some tracks would definitely help. @TurboHog, if you said that happened to you in a multiplayer session, you should have the track stored on disk. Anyway, I tried to do two take-offs. One with the Nose Cone Switch in the On position and one with the switch in the Off position. (See attached tracks). I tried to do the same thing flying wise in both attempts. Full burner, accelerate to 300km/h, rotate, retract the gear, accelerate to 400km/h, at 600m retract the flaps. Then levelling out at 1000m and accelerating to 1000km/h in level flight. With the Nose Cone Switch in the On position it would take 1:02 (minutes:seconds) from lift-off to 1000km/h. With the Nose Cone Switch in the Off position it would take 1:20. So a bit slower, however probably not equalling to the amount of performance decrease you guys are reporting. NoseConeOn2.trk NoseConeOff2.trk

I quickly did some tests and having the SPRD-99s attached does not really seem to take a toll on flight performance. It might have some drag, but not as much as experienced by other users.

That might be somewhat the case. See here: http://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=132197

Where can we donate? ;)

Did you turn the nosecone switch back to the on position after reamrming? Because currently that switch is flicked to the off-positon whenever you change youd armament. When the nosecone is not powered, it will fully retract, and therfore create a huge power for the engine shortage.

That is probably just imagination. There was nothing about the flight model nor about the suspension on the release change log.

There is a third question missing: Start useless polls in the wrong place (MiG-21 Forum).

A track sure would help!

Yes, it should probably be like a modern day stability augmentation system. You point the aircraft in some direction and when you let go of the stick the aircraft keeps maintaining pitch and roll. Such things are always a bit difficult to simulate though, because most people don't have Force Feedback sticks and therefore it gets a bit more difficult to implement properly. Similar to the Ka-50 trimmer / AP combination. It should be easy to use, but when you don't have a FF stick, it is a bit more demanding than it should be.

I am also wondering why we need two triggers. We have to select the gun either way with a separate button, why not have both, Weapon Release and Fire Cannon on the same trigger. Especially when it can come in quit handy in the Ka-50 to have your thumb available for other stuff while firing weapons (designating targets, etc.).

The jammer seems to be broken currently. At least I couldn't get it to jam anything. You can turn it on with the left most switch (takes some time to warm up) and the green ligt will come on. However it won't detect radiaton currently and thefore automatic chaff/flares don't work and the jamming is probably not working too. Let's hope it will get fixed soon.

Maybe this is somewhat time related. A certain time after ejecting them the invisible part detaches or something like that? Yes, go ahead! We need all the bugs to be fixed ;)

Theoretically not. You should prevent at all cost to enter the red area on the torque-meter. If you get into the red area you are at risk of damaging your gearbox. However over-torque and engine overload situations aren't simulated at this point (they hopefully will be added one day...). However, on other helicopters, like the Mi-8, the gearbox is capable of more torque than the engines can produce. The engines themselves are at least somewhat prevented from overload situations due to their electronic control and governor systems.

Now that is interesting. The boom and shudder was definitely notable. However, nothing in game points to the reason for this. Now let me ask you one question: Did this ever happen when you weren't using the SPRD-99 JATO rockets? Because I think they are the reason for this problem. After watching your track I had a look at the TacView recording, and this is what came to my eye: You can see, at 6:42:45 (the same second the boom could be heard) you were hit by your own SPRD-99 rockets. Which is strange, because you jettisoned them just after take-off. It seems that at 6:38:45 INVALID_NAME[4.4.32.249] has been fired by you. This seems to be the 3D model of the dropping SPRD-99s. However while the 3D model of the SPRD-99s fell to the ground, some invisible part of it must have stayed attached to the aircraft. Until the point where that invisible part got detached from the aircraft at 6:42:45 and hit you, with the boom and shaking as a result. This is something Leatherneck must look at. Seems either to be an issue with the naming of some of the objects or maybe it is a workaround for something. I have attached the TacView file for your flight. Best regards, Jonathan TacView.zip

Hard to tell. Can you post a track next time that happens?

Other units in DCS always appear bigger when in external view. I guess it probably has todo with the FoV. Though I am still thinking that it is quite realistic currently. IRL I have often been in situations where I knew where another airplane had to be. Even if that aircraft was just 4-5km out, it was often very time consuming to spot, if spottable at all. While these aircraft weren't fighters, they often had similar dimensions. Spoting another aircraft while flying one, is not comparable to spotting an aircraft from the ground. It is much much harder.

Thanks for the feedback! I didn't know that about keeping the lock button pressed. Thanks for pointing that out!

Hi, Another requested video for the series: Flying an approach using the RSBN and the SAU autopilot. If you have any more suggestions, feedback or questions, please let me know! Thanks, John

I think it has been 120 for a long time.

DCS World/Config/graphics.lua

It is similar for me. While the performance seemed to stay somewhat the same, I started to experience those micro stutters. This started to happen with this patch, and wasn't present before. EDIT: I just realised the Updater removed the changes I made in the "graphics.lua". I set the "maxfps = 40;" to 40 again (120 is the default value) and now it is as smooth again as it was before. Maybe you guys, having similar stutters, try the same?

I have attached a short track of me flying a traffic pattern in the MiG. A bit overweight on landing, but else okay. Next time I should not try to cut off my parachute before deploying it though... MiGTrafficPattern.trk

I do agree with that. Feels like it did before.