foxbat155

Since Mig-23 (except MS variant) Soviet radars had automatic and manual work modes. During GCI guidance ground center was able sent info about target's position to fighter. If radar was set to automatic mode, then after receive this info, radar was able move antenna to this direction. When target was in appriopriate distance radar automatically changed mode to STT and was able prepare missiles (if those were in automatic mode as well). So GCI wasn't able directly control weapon system but signals from GCI were kind of triggers for automatics. So, in MiG-23 pilot was steering aircraft according commands from ground to some point in space, then depending on weapon system mode (auto or manual) air target attack was done by pilot or by radar's automatics. Some aircrafts like MiG-25, late Su-15, MiG-31, Su-27 had really expanded automatics and aircraft was able doo everything almost automatically, pilot just have to set parameters range like max speeds, altitude, switches and modes in right combinations, establish communication with GCI center etc. Whole procedure was complicated and not always enough elastic but Soviets loved GCI systems, had few types of them and perceived them as a very effective compare to typical voice over radio guidance. Soviet PVO had integrated in one system fighters and SAM's units and GCI was able choose between fighters or missiles use.

Well...…..nope. GCI system was automated, data link was automated, but autopilot wasn't. MiG-23MLA and MiG-23P have only one difference: data link device type, MLA had Lasoor, P had PVO's used system called 5P15 because WWS and PVO were separate air forces formations and were use different GCI systems. Autopilot from MiG-23 (whatever which variant) have only two automated modes: route flight according RSBN-6S, and landing approach according PRMG-5. This is very common misunderstanig what means by Soviets "automated GCI", first systems from late 50's and early 60's had a operator, person which was observing radar's scopes and manually was setting and sending commands to fighters by ARL. Later systems were automatized, GCI operator only have to assign target to fighter, choose tactics variant and all rest was calculated and sent by computers in GCI center. Like written before only MiG-25/31, later Su-15 and Su-27 had this capability.

MiG-23 wasn't able fly automatically according GCI commands, only semi-automatic or directive, pilot was steering plane according command on instruments. Aircrafts like MIG-25P/PD/PDS, Su-15T/TM, MiG-31, Su-27 are able doo intercept automatically without pilot's help ( except of course pressing trigger ).

SPO-10 had only two variants: pre 1972 and after 1972, but both have the same functionality, just part of electronic blocks were modernized in later one ( more service reliable). System was produced in two sets: "light" for tactical aviation, and "full" for heavy machines like bombers, transport aircrafts etc. Yak-28, Tu-16 had SPO-3 ( SPO-10's direct predecessor), Su-7 all variants had SPO-2.

Both situations are correct, many late Soviet's aircrafts were flying with dismantled mud guards ( simmilar situation was with single seat aircrafts ), generally almost all export aircrafts were flying with those guards, why those mud guards were dismantled in late service? don't know, but probably reason wasn't any serious one, I'm sure that all new aircrafts had them, just later on many was dismantled.

For those interested how looks inside MiG-23's inertial platform

That's real engine data, how is modeled in game?, well, only developers knows this, SFC for second reheat don't know honestly.

economical trust 3400 kg (33,3 kN) maximum dry trust 4100 kg (40,3 kN) 1 reheat 7100 kg (69,6 kN) 2 reheat 9900 kg (97,1 kN) SFC: 92,8 g/Kn/h (economic) 97,9 g/Kn/h (maximum) 229,4 g/Kn/h (reheat)

This is folded anti-sun blind.

Except some minor differences, aerodynamically all Mig-19 variants were identical, that's why in late 50's almost all documentation was unified. One book, like pilot's manual,was devoted to all variants, just some unique features, like Rp radar , had separate chapters.

Great!, stylization for original manual looks fantastic. Cheers.

As far I know those pods were made from rebuilt ORO-8 pods, barrels were removed, front was covered by conical fairing, they were looking like chinese variant of ORO's.

In Poland MiG-19's were used in three units: 28 PLM ( Pułk Lotnictwa Myśliwskiego, Fighters Air Regiment ), Słupsk city, 62 PLM, Krzesiny near Poznań city, now home of polish F-16's, 39 PLM, Mierzęcice town.

But you don't have to change ARK-5 funcionality to achieve this. Just implement something what existed at MiG-19 service period - mobile NDB mounted on the truck PAR-8: http://aviaros.narod.ru/par-8.htm Then users are able add radio aids for every airfield and set frequencies. Good idea is aswell implementation of visual lantern which was popular at that time - KNS-1P. She was visible up to 30 km, and was sending visual Morse code. https://www.google.pl/search?q=%D0%9A%D0%9D%D0%A1-1%D0%9F&source=lnms&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjKsc2vjqrgAhUDPVAKHQ9eBgsQ_AUICSgA&biw=1904&bih=925&dpr=1

I personally think, that is better implement ARK-5 like was in reality, i'm sure that users will able deal with any ARK's limitations without any problems. We are here for flying not for judging and improving the past.

Well, generally range should be between 150-300 km depending of flight altitude. Terrain obstacles don't have influence on device range, but they changing ARK accuracy. Low level flights, over mountain flights, even night flights can cause azimuth errors up to 90 deg. But I don't think that DCS engine is able handle those things properly. PS. Tarres have right - no preprogramed frequencies in ARK-5, this knob is for changing frequency ranges for quick ARK self tuning. Pilot tunes main frequency ( far NDB ), sets by knob frequency range of second station ( near NDB ), and during landing after passing far NDB, just switch to near NDB without necessity of manual tuning because he need to be focused on landing.

You forgot about: all have wings, stabilizers and landing gear. You're a good joker.

What about add some LGB's and TGP?.

And this is very good decision.

In RL only radarless variants had RWR - SPO-2.

You right Koty, but some small clarification. MiG-19P had one radar with two antennas, one small antenna for tracking and upper bigger antenna for search duties. Search antenna had two reflectors, one was looking up above aircraft's axis (0 deg to +13 deg), second was looking down below aircraft's axis (0 deg to -13 deg). Search antenna was turning from left to right, sweeping alternately "upper" or "lower" part of scanning area. Turning speed was 80 rpm's, so 360 deg sweep was held in 1,33 sec, this means that target's blips from "upper" and "lower" were refreshed every 1,33 sec, but "middle" blips every 0,67 sec. According some sources search antenna was working with G-load up to 4, but I'm not sure about this info. Rather is impossible turn off one of search antenna's reflector from cockpit so probably low level trick needed some pre flight technician intervention.

R-3S wasn't direct copy of GAR-8, we can call her: inspired by Sidewinder. Some discussion was already here: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=207593&page=12 Many small and bigger changes, and overall better parameters.

Rain and snow fall in the same time?. Quite often in central-eastern Europe during winter time.

Ad.1 No Ad.2 No Ad.3 No/Yes Ad.4 Yes Ad.5 No Existed three variants of this missile: RS-1U, first variant for MiG-17PFU and Yak-25K RS-2U, second variant exclusively for MiG-19PM, RS-2US, third variant for Su-9, MiG-21PFM, MiG-21M and MIG-21MF R-3S was adopted only for MiG-19P as a upgrade in early 60's, some chinese clones had another armament, but those are different aircrafts from the original MiG-19.