foxbat155

Yep guys, you right, over-interpretation from my side, well is Friday....:music_whistling:.

Well, it's question what we have on the original wiring scheme: transistor when vertical line inside circle is tiny or thyristor when that line is thick: For my looks more like thick line, if you guys see there tiny line i'm ok with that:thumbup:.

That's simplified symbology used on many wiring schemes. Check this out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Thyristor

Well, therefore I called SPO-10 "relatively simple"...:music_whistling:. Thyristors are here:smilewink:

Well, it's hard to call this system fault, I think more accurate word is weakness. SPO-10 it's relatively simple analog device, you don't will find inside any signal processors, any software just few resistors, capacitors, coils, thyristors etc. Whole set comprise 4 anntenas, 4 amplifiers, power unit, display unit and signal/lights processing unit, everything created in 1965. Whole set diagram: Signal/Lights unit inside: Amplifier inside: Signal unit wiring diagram: Like you can see all is classic electronics from pre-digital era, and in some conditions is just not enough effective. According manual from distance bigger like 5 km lock direction should by shown without problem. Regards.

Well, according RL manual 4 lights you will get only from 3-5 km depending radar power. With bigger distances Spo should show lock direction without any problems. This feature is because of relatively small directional sensivity of antennas, from close distance radar signal is enough strong and reaches all antennas even those shadowed by fuselage and system have problem with selection. This have nothing to do with any "Danger Close Warnings" it's just electronics from 1960's. Regards.

Engine from clip it's from MiG-23 not 21. This is R-29-300.

Please read carefully, both manuals polish and english says about radar SCREEN angles not radar itself. Of course this not means some big differences between them but we still don't have precision angle values for radar antenna and no information about antenna move pattern.

Pictures are just pictures, of course they don't tell anything about stabilization parameters, they just shows that mechanism was quite complicated. Thats why we need real manual. RP-22 it's not just enhanced variant of RP-21. This is totally new construction, next generation radar ( monopulse 2 gen. ). RP-22 is simplified and smaller variant of the RP-S "Smierch" radar from Tu-128 and MiG-25 fighters. Constructors use one of the frequencies from RP-S, and created small package with much less power output ( in the same way was created radar RP-15 "Typhoon" from Su-15T/TM fighter ). RP-21 is evolution of RP-9 ( CD-30 ) from Su-9 and created on RP-1/RP-5 family basis from MiG-17PF/PFU and MIG-19P/PM fighters. Only thing which connecting both radars it's MiG-21.

Guys all informations from Mig-21-online.de are devoted RP-21 radar. RP-22 is totally different generation, works different and her angles are bit different. To judge Leatherneck's work we need RP-22 manual, maybe somebody have her and will show. I have manuals only for RP-21. And how looks stabilization mechanism in real antenna: Cheers.

I will help you guys with this discussion a bit. Here launch zones for R-3S from original polish military manual. Data for target speed/fighter speed ratio 0,7: I think for R-3R those graphs should look a bit better due less seeker limitations + of course front hemisphere.

Thanks Cobra, no doubts you are a texture master here.:notworthy:

Thanks for kind words, well... this is your font+my "licentia poetica":D.

Hi, I've done final variant ( I think is final :music_whistling:). Changed grey off lights, old were bit flat, corrected dim lights for night flying, and created dark off lights for those who don't like the "real" one: Enjoy. Regards. lights russian.zip lights english.zip

I've made new lights with Flanker font ( thanks, great work ). Two variants english and russian, english texts were made according original Bis manual in english. I hope you will like it. lights english.zip lights russian.zip

Flanker, please tell what kind of font you used?.

I corrected light. Three dds files in attachment, need to be placed in cockpit texture folder. Now when I saw last Flanker upgrade I not sure that my work is still attractive.:(:doh: Lights.zip

Show please where is this mistake? Ok, you right I found them. Thanks, I will correct them and then i will post.

Hi, Thanks Flanker for your great work. I've done my little improvement with lights annunciators to achieve more realistic look: If anyone wants this lights just PM me. Regards.

Cockpit is a great idea. Unfortunately I don't have main panel dimensions but i found some photos in my computer: Not my work, found in internet, sorry don't remember source. Here canopy dimensions: I have plenty MiG-21 cockpit photos, if you need something don't hesitate just pm me.

Guys, I have scanned original RSBN-5 manual from 1976 in polish language ( from Su-20 aircraft ). If anyone from you wanna struggle with reading or translation please PM me, I will send you copy. Regards. :thumbup:

It's great that MiG got some attention last time. Playing with windscreen you have to choose what type you want to do: Early type characteristic for all PFM/R/S/SM/SMT/M/MF and early Bis aircraft.... ....or the late one made only for Bis. Difference is in glass shape, sealant width. Generally all elements have width outside approx. 8 cm, inside cockpit 14 cm. But in my opinion external views are minor problem, bigger we can find inside cockpit: This foto shows cockpit view similar ( slightly below ) to pilot's line of view. We can clearly see how look windscreen and..... ...now how this look in DCS. Changing this simple mistake/bug, it's possible to improve forward visibility and achieve realistic look.

Gentleman, first in reality L-39 never was able to fire R-3S. She was only capable take training round R-3U. This is not combat aircraft but training machine, so don't expect some extraordinary capabilities. Young pilot had only discover the general rules for use those kind of weapon. Real combat training was later in combat unit.

Well, I don't have source - you told that "we have" and i was thinking that you really have. Why in my opinion more sophisticated ?. Look at the photos: control panel have additional functions, IPV screen have additional switches similar for those from Su-27 ( not existing on export machines ), all those "things" are not there without reason don't you think?. And at last, Soviet aircrafts always had better electronic equipment, even compare to Warsaw Pact variants. This can be only wishful thinking from my side, but can be true as well. You don't have proof for "No", I don't have proof for "Yes", it means that discussion is open. We need only documentation. Maybe it's time, after so many years, for real development supported by real documents.

So, it's means no source?.:music_whistling: