Schmidtfire

The brightness level becomes a bit better when zoomed in. At a normal FOV it is dark and graphics lacks the glow shown in the real life pictures above. Cockpit lighting has been strange after switch from DCS 1.5.X. Red light becomes washed-out pink (M2000C instruments), Orange becomes washed out yellow/white (C-101 and Viggen RWR lights), Green becomes very light green (Viggen Radar display). Colors are washed out during daytime missions compared to 1.5.X with HDR and that affects modules across the board.

L-39 pilot mentions: "real L-39's have NO adverse yaw, none, and need NO co-ordination of the rudder with the ailerons. (Like almost all jets, I've been told. I wouldn't know. The L-39 is the only real jet I have flown".

You always have to look at the bigger picture. Helicopters are great for promoting new maps, because it's easier to enjoy objects, the detailed mesh etc. Hard to get anyone excited about a map from 30000ft. ED also needs to make new AI ground units, AI soldiers, FLIR system etc. And that goes hand in hand with helicopters and being down in the weeds. I also suspect that the Heli market might be bigger than we realize, it's easy to throw it under the bus as "niché" because helis are not common on multiplayer servers. I expect lots more helo content to show up in the next couple of years, helo ops in DCS has not reached it's full potential.

All good points. Probably not possible, but it would be quite cool if the helmet visor could lower amount of canopy reflections when in use. Giving it a bit more purpose in the sim. Maybe not the most technically realistic approach, but it will give perception of realism.

Most likely a 3D revamp would also mean a DLC (to pay for hours put into the revamp). Huey is probably still a good seller in the store, it is such an iconic helicopter. But making a new cockpit also lowers the profit of every purchase. While it is not the most gorgeus cockpit anymore, Im not sure that a 3D revamp will be enough by itself to increase sales. So from a company point of view a DLC makes the most sense here. It brings attention to the module for prospective buyers and lot's of Huey fans will also choose to update. Also looking at the roadmap, with new functions for transporting troops etc... It makes a lot of sense making a DLC.

Since, the UH-1H module is in good shape.. and if it is loaded with new content... yes. But in the case of F-5E Tiger II for example, I think ED should fix and complete what is missing on the original module before making a DLC.

Can also confirm this. It is a long standing bug, most noticed on guided weapons in DCS. AIM-54, CM-802AKG, AGM-84D, AGM-84E/H and probably others too. We tested this in multiplayer a few days ago, all clients went to spec in F6 view and we got different height, speed and bearing of weapon. Some clients registred hits while others did not and the weapon was still flying! We also did a desync test on runway. We dropped a bomb and then one of the clients rolled Hornet right up to the edge of the crater. We then had all clients go into F2 view and share video over Discord. ALL had slight variations of crater texture and also position of the Hornet. For one client the front nose gear was on the edge of crater, on another client the Hornet was fully into the crater etc. Go into F2 or F6 view during multiplayer sessions and you will soon find that many clients see different things because of desync. Edit: This was on a private server, not dedicated. 5 clients, low ping and simple mission without many units and no scripts or mods running.

A Gopro does not mimic human vision, it is a single lens camera with tiny latitude. It is not a good example for a reference. Im not saying you are wrong, I have sat in a couple of jets in museums, but not up in the air under a beating sun. My stance is that it should be adjusted in relation to us watching on a 2D monitor, with varying resolutions and options enabled.The reflections are also of quite poor quality render wise. That is fine when they are subtle, but very noticeable when they are as strong as now. Anyways, looks like they have been adjusted and tweaked for next update. Im pretty sure this discussion will continue then

Thanks for the detailed description and tips! I suspect that the afterburner usage is the culprit. Im a heavy user of AB and Emergency AB. Need to be a bit more careful when going downhill as I tend to have it engaged a lot during combat. I know it's not good pushing the nose over, but it's hard sometimes to resist taking that shot or getting into a better position. Not being in afterburner in those situations should buy me time from flaming out and then I can re-engage burners when in a better condition. Overspeed is usually not an issue, only time is when I need to escape on the deck and push it too hard. At one point I tried to set the nosecone manually to prevent this, but nowdays Im just keeping it in auto.

I think it's the same. Just wondering if it was this particular and sensitive with negative G's in real life, or if it is a DCS-ism. You know, a little bit overmodelled - like the VRS for the helicopters.

One thing I have always wondered about the MiG-21bis... engine flameout. Was it really this easy to flame out the engine in real life? Reading about aerobatic like furballs in middle east conflicts. And also comparing it against all other jets currently in DCS... Can it be that flameout on MiG-21bis is a bit overmodelled? Flying as carefully as I can during combat, it seems almost impossible to avoid at least 1 engine restart per sortie. If this was true in real life, the TF-30 compressor stalls of F-14 would be peanuts in comparison. Not looking for a change here. Im used to it by now after all these years. Just curious if flameout a bit overdone and exact to the second when pushing a "non recommended maneuver".

I have not read anywhere that reflections from MiG-21 did affect the pilots the way they affect the average DCS player. If it was a well documented issue on the MiG-21 in real life, please make it as reflective as you want. Loads of scratches... again, was this a real problem IRL? Many different countries operated the MiG-21, but we have to assume that most tried to keep the canopy as protected as possible. The cost of loosing pilot and aircraft because a bad canopy is just too steep. I agree that the vision out of MiG-21 was known to be bad, but it has more to do with the overall design. As for realism, it is highly subjective when it comes to vision and perception. Both of us are sticklers for realism, but we have two different approaches to the same subject.

There it is! Thanks for info

We are drifting a bit of topic. I have found the MiG-21 to mostly have three different colors (illustrated in picture below) Turquoise Turquoise-Green Green (not as common as the first two) Blue might also exist, but the ones I have managed find are not true blue, more like a Turquoise-Blue mix. Over 11000 MiG-21's was made and maintained, so there must have been some variations Anyways, great to see that DCS: MiG-21bis still gets love. Got it back in 2014 and Im always recommending a try or purchase when I can.

It won't change THAT much. You will still be shredded by a BTR machinegun or a sneaky BMP launching anti-tank missile. Iglas can be helpful if you catch someone flying low and slow, but most of the time you will get hit by AIM-120, 9X or R-27ER with the new MWS and SPO-10 screaming at you. It's a nice upgrade but don't expect a gamechanger.

Like in this video?

Yes, maybe. Here is also a comparison. On the MiG-15 reflections are more subtle. Might be a bug as you posted above, or might be related to material thickness. I do like the look of the new reflections, just need to dial it in. We need something that gives impression of realism but is also practical flying on a 2D display. It should enhance the overall experience.

@Hiromachi @-Rudel- Can this issue be related to thickness of canopy glass? Default module Su-25T has the same sort of issues with overblown reflections. Externally, the canopy glass looks almost frosted. The same goes for the MiG-21bis. Looking at CoBlue's screenshots you can also see from inside of cockpit that the glass is a bit dim. A little bit like being inside a Crystal ball. Some modules handles the reflections better, so that also leads me to think there is an issue that can be tweaked.

Not sure it is a gamma issue, but if it is, would it be possible to add displays for lower gamma settings in special options? Most friends Im flying with are lowering the gamma from default. Technically gamma 2.2 should be correct and optimal, but somehow it does not present well during daylight flying in DCS. Value 2.2 is good for night missions, but for daylight missions the sweetspot seems to be around 1.8. Again, I think you are right mastering at 2.2, but there is something strange in how DCS World handles light. For me, both TID and VID (at night with red filter) is dark and hard to read. Not experiencing the same issue using other modules with displays in them. Thanks for reviewing this.

A good way to please both camps would be to ship an additional version with BS3! Late 1980's or very early 1990's version. No ABRIS, perfect for Cold War and low intensity type missions. It will be the ultimate DLC, giving us a wide range of Ka-50. From very basic to the currrent version and all the way to a modified plausible version. Obviusly this type of "creative liberties" should not be a standard practice. We might end up with a strange type of "DCS reality". However, it is understandable that ED had to go that route with BS3, not only for commercial reasons but for how the laws work. As Chizh wrote, If they could do it 100% for real they would. Ka-50 is sort of the first born at ED, so I think they will try their best to make it a good DLC.

The AIM-9B behaviour looks kind of cool. But here is the interesting part. GAR-8 (AIM-9B) was developed by Belsimtek (now ED) for use on F-86F module. R-3S was developed by Leatherneck for MiG21bis and later put on L-39 and MiG-19P. Obviously they developed the missiles in different ways and thats why there is such a difference in DCS. Also to note is that none of the missiles fly in that classic snakelike sidewinder pattern. What missile is closer to real I don’t know.

As for missiles: R3S slightly ”improved” AIM-9B R3R closest would be AIM-9C R13M is close to the AIM-9G R13M1 is close to the AIM-9J AIM-9P is close to the AIM-9J Rb24J = AIM-9J Rb24 = AIM-9B RS-2US beamriding missile. R-55 same missile but IR seeker. R-60 limited all aspect capability. R-60M all aspect capability (DCS) CONCLUSION AIM-9P, RB-24J and R-13M1 is equally matched. Rb24 and AIM-9B are equally matched. R3S is a bit better, at least in DCS.

Regarding R-60 against ground targets. United States actually developed AGM-87 Focus for this purpose. The idea was to retain the IR seeker of the AIM-9 and use it during night attacks on trucks, campfires and other targets with IR signature against a cool background. It was tested successfully in Vietnam but was dropped in favour of other weapons.

I don't know if this will help, but you can have the ship stationary until % damaged by AI MiG-21 (a trigger) and then the ship will try to move away at full speed. Or choose another AI aircraft that has Anti-Ship mission. Moving ship attacked by MiG-21 might be solvable by some clever scripting and triggers, but it is a bit out of my level of knowledge.

I have not looked at your mission. But here is a workaround: Set the MiG-21 to Ground Attack. Under Advanced Waypoints select Bombing and choose weapon, how many to expend etc. Put the bombing marker on top of the ship to be striked. This obviously only works if the ship is standing still as the AI wingman is set to strike the ground/sea where the ship is located. I have tried this using AI F/A-18C dropping Mk84's on a submerged Submarine, so it should work for you too. Have not tried with rockets or other weapons, but that should work as long as it is something that can be targeted against ground. This short tutorial will give you the basics: