Corrigan

Known bug, and IIRC it's fixed in the internal version.

I hope I got the Russian right.

I (and I suspect others who are limited by VRAM) got quite sizeable improvements. I went from 26 to 33 fps looking down into the cockpit.

Well, if it's that or a runway crash I guess.

My track above is from SP.

Right, that's what the training mission says, but when I'm 50 m behind something with the pipper following him and lock tone, I expect the missile seeker head to be tracking. Yet, no lights! Probably a bug, or the training mission has the wrong missiles. Was just wondering if those lights come on for anyone else.

Ok, if they're for specific weapons maybe the loadout is wrong in the IR training mission, cause they don't work for me in that.

Are you talking about the green light on the ASP, or one of the lights in the column of 3 to the right of the ASP? I can never get the latter to light up.

For me, being in the vicinity of several other 21s makes it unplayable. My system is about 4 years old, but until recently, I still thought of it as an ok machine. GPU update coming, though!

Nonsense. This is not Counter-Strike with planes. Realism above all, and red-blue balance must not interfere with that. Regarding your "anyone reasonable" comment, I think many more people would agree with me than you.

Yeah, Novak responded to the idle drag, dunno if you saw that.

Haaaaaave ya met Draken? :) But yeah, this isn't really the same thing as when a modern jet does it on purpose, I know. I just wanted an excuse to post that video :D

EDIT: it censored my track file name? wasn't expecting that! well played, wags. fuckinglightsplease.trk

A friend and I took turns locking eachother with the MiG-21 radar. When I was behind him, in search mode, his RWR indicated a lock (constant tone and constantly lit 'eyes'). When I locked him, his RWR stayed this way. When I unlocked, turned off my radar and even broke away, his RWR still indicated a lock. Mine did the same. Cycling RWR power on and off did not help, so we had to mute them in the end. Thus, maybe two bugs: inability to distinguish between lock and search, and RWR not understanding when lock has ceased, even after there are no possible radar contacts in the vicinity and power to RWR has been cycled on and off. Of course, it could be the radar being bugged instead.

Ok, so I did some tests with our new realization about how to interpret the charts. I went for the 5000 and 7000 m climb, as we've done before, but now measuring both distance and time from a standing start, not as you did in the first post, from when the climb commences. We know this has to be the correct way to do it, since the charts are uninterpretable upon the other view. They simply must measure time and distance from a standing start, or they are geometrically not possible, as detailed earlier. My test: (Using a clean aircraft with 100% internal fuel, and 15 deg C base temp, starting from Batumi) I took off and stayed on reheat until 600 km/h IAS. I then come out of reheat and stay level (in Recovery mode) on full military until 870 km/h TAS. This took me 70 seconds and 11 km. I commence climb, maintaining 870 km/h TAS all the way to altitude. Total time and distance taken from start of takeoff roll to arrival at 5 000 m: 3 min 17 s and 40 km. Total time and distance taken from start of takeoff roll to arrival at 7 000 m: 4 min 40 s and 60 km. Fuel consumed: 420 L. The chart says: Total time and distance taken from start of takeoff roll to arrival at 5 000 m: 3 min and 25 km. Total time and distance taken from start of takeoff roll to arrival at 7 000 m: 4 min 10 s and 40 km. Fuel consumed: 425 L. Discussion: I wanted to keep this test going to 9 and 11 km, but the 870 km/h TAS regime became too hard to maintain, so I terminated the experiment. I ended up basically zoom climbing, because trying to keep 870 TAS means basically not climbing very much at 8 km, which seems very unrealistic for a MiG-21 without external stores. The time to reach 5000 was pretty good, but the distance was way off. I don't know why this is, but it's definitely physically possible; due to different characteristics in climbing and accelerating in even flight, the time and distance can vary independently. In the 7000 climb, distance is still off, and the time starts diverging with the chart. As we know from before, climbing characteristics are very poor at higher alt. Fuel consumption remains very accurate during the tested interval. Conclusions: Power/drag seems poor above ~5000. Previous results show that 10 000 m and 11 000 m climbs are not even possible with the method used in the charts, and a ceiling at not much higher than 15 000, so it's reasonable to conclude that the poor performance worsens with altitude. The reasonable climb time but poor climb distance to 5 and 7 km is difficult to interpret. It's possible that there's a lack of power even at low altitude, but the most serious problem by far still seems to be the lack of climbing ability above ~7000 m and the very low service ceiling. Track is attached. Note that T-O roll starts 10 seconds in. Also, I noticed that there are inconsistencies in the SARPP data from your climb tests in post one. You come out of burner at around 850 IAS in the first one, for example. Anyway, time taken from TO-roll to altitude is something like 6.3 mins, not the 4 min 40 s it should take according to the chart. I suspect it's VERY important to be absolutely sure of being in MIL power. I got very different results in my tests, when I thought I had the throttle at 100% but must have been a tiny bit off. 5km7kmclean.trk

Well, if someone ever dared to perform a cobra that close to the ground, I guess that's kinda what it'd look like.

I wouldn't hold my breath (hurr hurr) since only things fixed before the 19th will be making this patch, and probably not even all of those things.

Run the updater!

You could open your axis display (rctrl+enter) and make sure your brake pedals are reaching the ends of the axes properly, perhaps. Did you do that "brake fix" axis curve thing posted on the forum?

Nah, there's a bug. I think I read that if you make some turns the needle might become unstuck. You should search the forums.

Right, but it has to be more than exaggerated rudder authority since it doesn't care about wind.

I think he'll be sufficiently dazed by the brilliance of my interpretation of his work to not get hung up on details like that, thank you very much.

Read what I posted! It's the bunker. Try spawning outside and see it disappear.

That's BS dude, this is a drawing contest.