mpdugas

It's true, and it reflects (no pun intended) a reality of the aerial environment, but there is some complaint made when the developers of the Team Fusion mod for IL2CoD added this very feature to their changes; someone thought it should be an optional feature, and that seems reasonable, if this is treated as a game, but maybe not so much if this is regarded as a simulation. see for the results. This particular video deliberately exaggerates the effect, I think, but it worth seeing, anyway.

Really nice thread; I'll add all of these to my collection of DCS images for my desktop and screensaver rotations.

I nominate Corrigan...

I need some razor blades and Goo-Gone so I can scrape off that tatty-looking list taped to the instrument panel. :music_whistling:

But in your signature, you don't list the cute little shoes!! :smilewink:

I think LN is a particularly class act because they are giving away sales to the crowd-funding folks, by way of free product keys, even though LN didn't get any income from the funding program... Any time a business acts on a morally-upright impulse, it is as noteworthy as it is rare. :thumbup:

see Corrigan, supra. :thumbup:

nautical miles per hour per hour is a rate of acceleration, not constant speed... pedantically speaking.

I gotta work more on my jokes...let's see...English miles, Roman miles, statute miles, nautical miles, Arabic miles, U.S. survey miles...which mph is it? I still like klick per hour, though, even if 'We ' don't, whoever that is. I do accept the correction for my redundancy: it would be knots, not knots per hour...thanks, Laxentis! "Klick" is fairly common spoken usage, for the longer word kilometer, among the military types of my acquaintance, anyway. Km/h or kilometers per hour (kph) are all fine for written expression, but I was hearing Bunyap trying to figure out how to SAY it in a simpler fashion. Most folks who were in the European theater that I knew, that is, military types, called the kilometer a 'klick' in their speech. So klick per hour would be an easy way to SAY it; I am curious, though, how the English-speaking military folks say the term kph or km/h in Europe. How does the LN/English-labelled cockpit for the MiG-21 write it?

Here are some recommendations for reading materials while waiting for the release: Bill Gunston (1986). Mikoyan MiG-21 Osprey Air Combat, Osprey Publishing Limited; and Yefim Gordon & Bill Gunston, (1996). Mig-21 'Fishbed' Midland Publishing Limited; and Mig-21 Super Profile (1984) Foulis Aircraft Book; and Don Linn & Don Sperling, (1993) Mig-21 Fishbed in action Squadron/Signal publications; and Zoltán Buza (1993) Lockon No.21, Aircraft Photo File 799 Verlinden Productions. Lots of history, pilot experiences, photos and such to while away the hours until simulated flight can happen. :)

uh...jk, not trolling, honest.

In reality, kph probably stands for knots per hour, which is likely why Bunyap collapsed that right main, landing at ~300+ knots is pretty hot, even for a rough-field bird like the MiG-21.

Wow...incredibly precise penmanship...a rare quality these days.

How about klicks per hour...

Hello, Abburo Check the Eduard modelling website; the Bunny Fighter is the MiG-21 model you purchase (at quite a price premium) to join his 'Bunny Fighter Club', which gets you club member discounts on further purchases. Eduard models the MiG-21 and many of its variant in exceptional detail. If you like plastic modelling, and you like the MiG-21, he is one of the best.

And any hope of Eduard's Bunny Club skin?

I had never heard that the MiG-21, in particular, was so complex in operation and put such a high workload on its pilot, although that is generally true of all Russian military designs. You just have to admire the whole Russian military paradigm: huge country to defend, not much money to do it with, enormous need for lots of very reliable (but not necessarily durable) and cheap gear, and who makes it all work? Some obviously very talented Russian soldiers, sailors and pilots. The early MiG aircraft series (pre-MiG-23 and its successors) are the aviation equivalent of the Kalashnikov small arms: cheap, reliable and, in the right hands, effective. In well-trained hands, MiG-21s made life very dangerous for Phantom pilots in Viet Nam, with a favorable win-loss ratio. In Korea, Russian piloted MiG-15s were capable matches for the F-86. Steve Adelmann just wrote an interesting article, in the August 2014 issue of Shooting Illustrated, about the 7.62 x 39mm round, and was quite surprised at its accuracy potential. No one doubts the effectiveness of the T-34, yet the German engineers who examined captured copies of it were appalled by the low quality of assembly. Nevertheless, it helped turned the tide of war on the Russian eastern front. It was cheap, reliable, effective, and made in huge numbers, just like the MiG-21 and various AKs. Rude, crude, hard to be subdued. Gotta give snaps for that.

The FW Ta-183 looks just like the old Aurora model of an unknown, purportedly, Mig circa late 1950s, molded in a lurid bright green...anyone else old enough to remember that one? http://images58.fotki.com/v696/photos/4/1486704/8843339/yak1-vi.jpg

MiG-21 in context I would be absolutely STUNNED if the Mig-21 F and MF weren't also modeled, particularly since the F version is such a classic maneuvering machine...some called it a hot-rod, which I believe would be a very enjoyable version to fly!! But I am not complaining; I am sooo pleased to be able to enjoy the MiG-21...the closest I ever got, in the sim world, was the Captain Sim version for MSFS.

It would be very interesting to be able to create scenarios within DCS world that attempted to emulate the historical era in which the MiG-21 was introduced. For example, would it be possible for a 3rd party developer to create a DCS addon module that simulates the GCI of the 1950's Soviet Union? I am guessing that the answer is 'yes', because airframe radar modules have to work within the DCS world, "seeing" and reacting to various 3D models in the game world (both airborne and ground-based) so I am thinking that 3D module radar equipment would likewise work. Maybe something like the SAMSIM ported to DCS world. I would very much like to know if DCS world is granular enough to change the environment itself as well as the components within the environment (like tank or helicopters, etc.)? If that were possible, then the P51 and FW-190 could meet in their historical era, as could the MiG-21 and its natural foes (e.g. the B52/47/58 and F-104) go to battle in their historical era. I don't think that the geographical area for employing something like that matters too much; the Crimea should work. Then the MiG-21 could realize its designers intent as a point-defense interceptor, much like it was employed in North Viet Nam or originally around the vast perimeter of the Soviet Union. There, it was part of an integrated ADS that centered on GCI...a MiG-21 without GCI is severely limited, because the machine itself lacks sufficient autonomy to carry out the full intercept. As it is today, the MiG-21 in a modern environment is not the same machine as the MiG-21 in the late 1950's. In the era of its introduction, it was quite successful against the opponents it was designed to confront. I think DCS world has a large potential; does the scenario editor permit such historical recreations?

Looks like this developer will get the odd rods right.

Su-24, with all the nuances of the attack profiles like it and the F-111 have to run...terrain-following radar would be great.

I'm well over 60, and a retired, disabled combat veteran with lots of time on my hands. I've a lovely wife to whom I have been married for over 44 years, and a son who is just entering the USMC at age 24. I still build my own PCs and love PC stuff generally. I'm active in several MMOs and still tinker around with simulations and games as well.

5. The effect of the MiG-21 3rd Party forum being gone: Beczl is silent.

Do you think that the only place that ED and Beczl Studio have to communicate with each other is a public forum on this BB? The MiG-21 forum was created by ED for us to talk directly to Beczl Studio about their DCS project. Doesn't public interest in a 3rd party project mean more money for ED? Do you really think they closed it so that we would not be privy to their private moments? I sincerely doubt that reason is why.