Schmidtfire

So the current assesment is that *The manual is wrong. CCIP bombing can be performed both at level and dive from M2000C. *The [NOT A BUG- USER ERROR] should be re-opened for investigation, as it is not user error. Dive or level flight, the CCIP symbol is valid and over target. Accuracy should be better in a dive, but has been reported as somewhat inaccurate in both level and dive attacks. CCIP accuracy is something that has been brought up before so might be worth doing a proper test. If this current CCIP inaccuracy is realistic or not, I don't know. It is not an ARBS system or anything like that. But comparing to Hornet, Viper, Tomcat and other modules with CCIP systems it might be a little bit off. Again, worth investigating. @ RABAM_ELMO I will do some testing in a dive and see if I can get some useful data and a track.

What is the correct way to do it in DCS is the real question. If manual states that CCIP is used in a dive, Im assuming a level attack counts as user error. Or is the manual/implementation wrong on DCS M2000C? For low level attacks you are less exposed in a pop-up -> dive attack. Swedish Airforce looked at information avalible after Desert Storm and concluded that diving attacks should be used and level bombing should be avoided at low altitude. This is info coming directly from a former Viggen pilot (who also fly DCS). Reason is that during Desert Storm level bombing at low altitude proved to be very risky as the aircrafts were exposed to AAA and other systems, flying in a straight line over the target area. They unfortunatly learned this the hard way.

For reference. DCS: M2000C official manual (DCS M-2000C Flight Manual EN.pdf) clearly states that CCIP is used in a dive. From Page 281

I had the same accuracy issues in a dive. Everything from 20-45deg. But I have no data to support it. There has been reports on the M2000C CCIP before, so It might be worth investigating. @ escaner maybe you should record a video with release in a dive?

Here is some info on the lasing vehicle: https://en.topwar.ru/31637-na-pomosch-letchikam-boevye-mashiny-aviacionnyh-navodchikov.html

https://topwar.ru/31637-na-pomosch-letchikam-boevye-mashiny-aviacionnyh-navodchikov.html

It is from this book: https://www.amazon.com/25-Frogfoot-Units-Combat-Aircraft/dp/1472805674 There is more info on the accuracy (or inaccuracy) of laser guided munitions used from Su-25 in the book. However, I just found that Su-25 Ground Designation is a hot topic on the Russian Forums. It does not seem Like something that was widely used.

Lasers might be better these days but during the Soviet intervention in Afghanistan, the Su-25 mostly used the sight in manual mode. The laser was found to be too inacurrate for precision strikes. At least over that kind of terrain. One particular Su-25 jet became the ”go to” striker as they fine-tuned the laser and sight on that jet. Another thing the Soviets did was to mount a laser (from a damaged Su-25) onto a BOMAN vehicle. With help of a machinegun sight the BTR-80 would roll up as close as possible to the target and lase from the ground for Su-25’s.

MiG-29 A/B can carry and shoot R-60. There is a documentary about F/A-18 vs MiG-29, and the pilot clearly shows R-60 as part of the armament. @ 8:50 the pilot talks about the ”older” IR missile. Also

F-104 is an instant buy for me!

Most likely yes. @ escaner Can you record another video with trigger press sound in external F2 view? Would be interesting to see the delay between you pulling the trigger and the bomb release.

I did a lot of practise CCIP bombing a few nights ago and had the same experience. Using a dive (everything from 20-45deg) the bombs frequently landed long. Flying the Hornet or Viper the bombs usually land bang on target. It can ofc. be user error, but I got a feeling that M2000C CCIP pared with 82SE is off and not very precise. I have no data for those runs, but that was my assessment afterwards.

I have noticed the high AoA issues. Something feels a bit wonky about that. In certain situations I can pull full backstick and pretty much "brake" in mid air. It loves to go fast, but is difficult to handle at speed. Diving on a bandit, even with throttle to idle, can be a deadly trap. I don't know how much the AoA issues come into play here, but it is easy to get into a dive you cannot recover in time from. MiG-21 habits are hard to break... Gonna try your tip and keep it close to 800km/h. And avoid fights in the vertical and ease up on the stick. For the gunsight do you use the gyro or radar at all? I have tried it a few times, but it seems like it is better suited for bombers or transports. The sight on the Tiger II seems a bit better in that regard.

Thanks for the information Hiromachi :) It's just frustrating with such a bug on a great module like DCS: MiG-21bis. Over six years old now and still one of the best. Hope that a solution can be found.

This issue was first reported in late March. That is a long time for a major bug. A lot of players have Nvidia cards and they like to be able to use radar without FPS dropping to an unplayable state. It has to be fixed and resolved. @Hiromachi, what is the latest word on this? If ED is working on a solution, maybe @NineLine can give some info on what is being done about this issue?

I have been flying the MiG-19P quite a bit on the JUST DOGFIGHT multiplayer server. How do I fly the jet to it’s strenghts? I find it difficult to handle and sluggish both in the vertical and in a turnfight. I know the MiG-19P is the heavy model, but I cannot understand the reputation that MiG-19 is a good dogfighter. What am I missing? :huh:

I do not work for ED :megalol: It should be included and working with the L39ZA. No additional cost. Just like it works for both versions C-101 and C-101CC. DCS is a military sim, but I do understand the reason why they placed it that way on the L-39C. What they need to do is integrate it properly with the ZA version (w. gunsight) as it makes more sense in every way to use that version for weapons training and light attack.

+1

How about making sure that a small number of fixes and updates are in by the end of the month for every "legacy" module? That way all modules are kept in good condition all year round :) That should be doable unless the staff is overextended. I get that there is a lot going on, but legacy or not these modules are still being sold att full price and should be supported as much as a newer module. I would not be happy to wait 12 months for F-5E fixes because it is not "legacy module of the month" for another year... :cry: I do like to see a "legacy of the month" module, but it should be a complement to the fixes. A new trailer, raise awareness of the module for prospective buyers and at the same time offer something a bit bigger update-wise. Maybe a texture overhaul or new sounds etc.

Who will take one for the team and subtitle this 2h+ interview? :D

F/A-18C is very good. Most detailed in DCS? It's in the top for sure but I don't know... One of the biggest gripes I still have with the Hornet is the reverse ground effect. It is flight model error. Flying extremely low you will get sucked into the ground. From what I understand this effect came about as a fix so that the Hornet wont slide around on the carrier deck. But very annoying when flying. Especially "Viggen type" missions in the weeds.

And why not? It was a good performing fighter for it's time. You also have to account pilot training, logistics, GCI support etc. So maybe the "complete package" made sense to use it a bit out of it's element. The AdA also had confidence against the type of threats that was out there. It's hard to judge that decision without seeing the bigger picture. Also, as jojo wrote. That was what they had to work with :)

It is more common for GA that the Garmin GPS unit is placed at the current position. Probably as it does not obstruct view and it is a rather clunky piece of kit. Not small like a car GPS. BUT I think it should be added to L-39ZA the same same way as C-101CC :) Makes sense. GPS with no gunsight L-39C, GPS with gunsight L-39ZA

Current GPS placement on L-39C makes sense if you look at videos of GA flying. More options would be nice, but there is a reason behind why it is placed like it is.

Honestly, get a plane you are interested in. That simple :) The full fidelity addons are great but require a fair bit of time and study to be enjoyed properly. So don’t run off and spend a lot of dollars on a plane because it does XYZ best. DCS is not an E-Sport game. Modern Air Combat is in development and will be a title more aimed towards fast combat and competitive multiplayer.