foxbat155

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.

This is typical data from many russian sources (books, arms catalouges etc), values are against RHA. Example here: http://www.russianarms.ru/forum/index.php/topic,4571.0.html?PHPSESSID=1s0pkbvs1u17f0orn7cqucdr60 T-55 had armour mostly between 30-160 mm RHA, and thickest in turret front 200 mm, so was penetrable for those rockets. Of course one hit wasn't able destroy tank, but good aimed salvo didn't had this problem. Pakistan lost lot of chinese T-55 copies from those FFAR's, which had use on Indian Su-7's.

Yes, that true, S-5 were created in first place for A-A fight (variant with fragmentation warhead). During trials of early jets, Soviets realize (and not only them) that in some cases cannons, even those with quite big caliber, can be inefective against big aircrafts. In early 50's effective A-A guided missiles didn't exist so FFAR's were seen as a kind of solution for cannon's weakness problem. This is reason why MiG-19 had those small pylons for ORO-8 launchers only, if cannons are not working, have to shoot down target with salvo of FFAR's. Main weapon for first serial MiG-21 variant were doubled ORO launchers called UB-16. Last aircraft in Soviet inventory with FFAR's launchers as a A-A weapon was MiG-23, he had lot of external stores variants when guided missiles were mixed with FFAR's. Btw, S-5 wasn't so weak like in DCS, S-5K anti-armour variant was able knock out T-55 like tank, was able pierce about 150 mm of steel, modernized S-5K1 about 170 mm of steel. Arab or Indian Su-7's destroyed many armours with those rockets.

Polish straight translation of Soviet manual. Precisely exist six variants: 1.MiG-19 with classic horizontal stabilizers, 2.MiG-19S, previous model development with all moving horizontal stabilizers, 3.MiG-19V, high altitude derivative of MiG-19S with lighter construction, 4.MiG-19SF, late series MiG-19S with ARU-3 system and others small changes ( in Army documents still called MiG-19S), 5.MiG-19P, interceptor with radar, based on MiG-19S, 6.MiG-19PM, previous model derivative with beam reading missiles, two subvariants with different GCI system. MiG-19S was base for all later variant, construction was different in nose section, and in part of equipment. Aerodynamicaly all those aircrafts are identical, except nose section. Pre-fin construction differences are connetced with control system modifications. Manufacturing blue prints can be find in OKB MiG archive, try ask them, maybe they will help. Until this time this should be enough: 3D model have some minor flaws, but like I written: we saw so far only wip build, so wait until release. Thanks Overstratos, I think this will close for while this strange discussion. Body still not found, but some are started autopsy already.

Seb, specially for you: Page from manual: Translation: "Horizontal and vertical stabilizers of MiG-19P aircrafts stay without changes compare to MiG-19S, except top fairing which was changed in connection with SPO-2 antenna deletion" My proposition to everybody: hold your horses, those footage is from wip builds, wait with criticism at least to module release.

Well, dedicate 20 minutes of your time, hit uncle Google, find photos, some manuals and, then you will see. All knowledge is right in front of you, just have to find her.