Schmidtfire

Sounds really complicated to get it right... but I'll give it another try. Working with visual / radar fixes in Viggen is a bit confusing, with the E (or flashing E) waypoints. You guys are saying that I somehow can make the ternav system automaticly keep nav system on point without drift?

Recently got back into the Viggen, but I have some issues with the use of the BK-90's. Let's say I pre-plan a strike by entering a target waypoint. If I have a couple of minutes flight to the target area, there is usually some drift to the nav system. What is the best way to deal with this? I have tried to mark targets on the radarscope instead, but the resolution is not there for ground units. At least not for me since the 2.5 graphics update. Islands, hills and coastlines are kind of ok. Any tips on how to reliably target the BK-90's?

That is looking really good Esac! You should really do the Su-27/33 and MiG-29 warning lights, they also need some love :thumbup:

This is not only in the manual, but what logic is there behind hearing a screeching sidewinder tone just because we have guns and camera selected? What pilot wouldnt find that distracting when strafing some buffaloes down low? If we don't have the pylons selected on armament panel, how can we even hear the sidewinder tone? That sound is directly from the missiles seeker head (that is connected through the pylon)! With the same logic we should have a GAR-8 sidewinder tone in F-86F Sabre when GUNS are selected. I don't know for sure, but why would Northrop feed unwanted audio into the pilots ears by bypassing the station selector switches? I am no Tiger II expert, but I would love to know the reasoning behind the current implementation in DCS.

AV-8B VTOL :joystick:

It is wip and not finished, have not tried turnrate. I would say it fly a bit strange atm. Better to wait until fully implemented.

IRL there are differences in flight control system etc. between MiG-29A and MiG-29S, so hopefully that means that ED makes some adjustments between the different versions, starting with the A/G models. But yes, your test verifies that they have started tinkering with the FM. They recently updated some of the sounds aswell as some artwork. We are getting close :)

На английском форуме. Возможно, вы можете помочь понять символику P-77. Круг и маленькая точка подобны индикатору типа ASE для рулевого управления? Что такое большой прямоугольник? Что означают 532 и 231 справа от HUD? Что означает YTP и KOHTP? what does the 2 6000 on the bottom Left corner mean ? VIDEO:

Care to post any pics of this DIY mod? Sounds cool.

Very interesting video! IvanK, you will probably have more luck posting in the russian FC3/MIG29 forums. But my guesswork is that the circle /small dot is a steering indication. Put a circle in a circle, like for the cannons or for landing Su-33 on the a carrier. KOHTP in Google Translate is translated as COUNTER. A lot of FC3 MiG29 symbology is not accurate or function like the real thing, like the helmet mounted sight. There is also a boresight HUD mode with a lage circle that is often shown in videos when fireing R-73 (does not look like any of the modes on current FC3 MiG29).

PFM is very close I think. Took her up for a spin yesterday, and it feels different. Same way as when Su33 was about to get PFM. Not fully implemented yet, but seems different from the regular SFM.

Just to point out, there are workarounds. For example, there is a reason that we have M2000C and not Mirage 2000C in DCS. Razbam could not get full cooperation from Dassault. Kamov helped ED with the Ka-50, a quite advanced helicopter with datalink. However, dealing with russian IP's and companies might be more difficult than dealing with for example Textron or Boeing. Chizh has stated on the russian forums that a Su-27 (or was it MiG29) is likely going to get made. But not now. I would not be suprised if a 3rd party like Deka Ironworks would make chinese versions of russian aircrafts. It is a growing playerbase + IP laws are a lot looser.

Here is another "rare" video. 7:45 in - Launch of R-3R! :) On the R-3S and GAR-8 subject. A lot of sources claims them to be almost identical and that the parts can be swapped between them. But foxbat155 might be right that some modifications was done. Why create an equally good missile without making any improvements? Warhead was changed to be heavier. But was it more effective? Other stuff like electronics, fuzing etc. was dependent on Soviet industry, so while very similar, there must have been some differences in guidence/performance. Good or bad. I have also read multiple sources on differences in system lifetime, so that is probably true aswell. R-3S has been used for such a long time, there should be a lot of documents on it. I guess a lot of confusion comes from a mixup between the R-3, R-3S, R-13 models. The thing about current R-3S in DCS (beside performance bug) is that in my point of view, it guides and tracks more like a modern missile. It pulls G's right off the rails, when the GAR-8 need time after launch to start steering and correct it's flightpath. Current DCS R-3S is still over performing in-close against a manouvering target. It lead-pursuits a hell lot better. Maybe R-3S was just that good IRL, but im very doubtful about that :p

Yes. Auditor is right. Besides the current bugs on the R-3S... Leatherneck/Magnitude3 version of the missile is not as well simulated first generation IR missile. It tracks and fly more like a modern missile. In real life R-3S is a direct copy of GAR-8 (AIM-9B), down to the part numbers. difference is a heavier warhead on R-3S. DCS World has a very detailed GAR-8 that was created by Belsimtek for the F-86 and F-5E. For optimal simulation and accuracy I would suggest to re-use GAR-8 missile code and also add additional explosives to the warhead. It would make a sense from both simulation and gameplay point. Cold War NATO and Soviet with equally capable missiles. Thanks for the updates Zeus67. Will buy this one for sure :thumbup: EDIT for inspiration. Found a video of live fire of R-3S. As you can see, the real missile did actually fly like a "snake" in those days, that is why it was called a sidewinder :)

OMG! This will be a lot of fun :)

This would be great as a flyable. It will fit very well together with the Tomcat and the carriers.

OK, thanks for letting me know.

LAlt+F1 gives a HUD only view (with overlays). Running a single monitor config, just wish to adjust the size and placement of the three overlays. So they fit close together and are a bit smaller. How do I go about config size and placement in this view? :helpsmilie: This is what it looks like now

Capt Zeen - how easy/hard is it to modify a profile with new artwork? Saw this the other day and it would be great to have something similar on a second screen through Helios :) https://www.boeing.com/features/2018/01/super-hornet-cockpit-01-18.page It is the new ACS for F/A-18 Super Hornet. Like the F-35 (and modernized F-15C) it is based on a big touch display. I like the idea of having the moving map a bit bigger than the other displays. Im sure SA in DCS on a similar layout would improve a lot.

+1. I did enjoy taking her for a spin, but the flickering is soooo annoying. And it has been for many months. I do understand that BST has a million things to do now, but this module is out of early access and the flickering is very prominent. So please BST, take a look at it :) Thx

It is smokeless now. Overall performance also seems a bit better than the GAR-8 (AIM-9B) it is based on.

I have also always had the feeling that the GAR-8 is the most accurate of the older missiles! Thing is that R-3S is also used with L-39 and upcoming MiG-19 module, so it is vital that it functions correctly, and is a good counterpart to the Aim-9B / GAR-8. R-3S was more or less an exact clone - down to the part numbers, only difference from what I know is that Soviet put a heavier warhead in the R-3S. Have to test this a bit more... but R-3S and Rb-24 turns better off the rails than the GAR-8. They feel quite modern in comparison to GAR8 that takes more time to adjust it's flightpath. From what I could see. R-3S overall is slower than both the GAR-8 and Rb-24. It barely hit 2000km/h and lost speed very very quickly. So a performance issue is present. A good solution would be to copy the GAR-8 code over to current R-3S missile. But maybe do a slight adjustment to payload and weight... One other thing I found when testing Rb-24 is that they are currently smokeless in DCS, so I have to send a bug report about that :book: Regarding R-60M, it is - according to manuals and other sources a "limited" all aspect missile. It should have more trouble locking on to the front, a bit better at the sides and really good at the back. It would probably suffer other issues when fired head-on with the optical fuze. An upgraded version, R-6MK had a radar fuze instead. So it is pretty well implemented atm. Earlier versions of DCS MiG21 you could only get lock in the rear and sides, but it was expanded to a short range lock for head on engagements. On FC3 modules the R-60M missile can get a head on locks at 4km+ and that is not what I call a "limited" all-aspect missile :p

Just to clarify a few things about the missiles. R-3S is a copy of the Aim-9B (previously called GAR 8 ). In DCS: R-3S, GAR-8 and Rb-24 should have similar performance. But there is a big difference between the missiles, so it is a bit hard to tell who of the developers got it right :huh: R-13M and R-13M1 are more advanced and not comparable to Aim-9B! They are closer to the Aim-9G Magnitude 3 missiles: R-3R R-13m R-13m1 R-60 (not M version) R-55 RS-2US Kh-66 "Grom" Im not sure if Magnitude 3 use their own version of R-3S or not... Sidenote. Missile lock-on capability is module dependent. For example: In the Hawk Aim-9M is only rear aspect and has a short lock-on range, but in other modules it is all-aspect missile with good range. Aim-9M on FC3 F-15C does not lock onto the sun. But same Aim-9M on F/A-18C does. R-60M is all aspect on the Mig21 and FC3 modules, but only rear aspect when mounted on L-39 (probably due to R-3S on L39 being rear-aspect)

Maybe we should sum up the most important fixes first? There are already some ongoing artwork, so I wont mention Rudel stuff :p I start: SPO-10 Missile performance degraded since a few versions back (being looked into) ASP functionality Launch / break lights in radar scope I don't know If they have any coders left, but it is close to being the awesome module it deserves :)

Wow. That is really cool info on the R-55 missile. I did not know that the R-55 didn't produce a tone. But why put a light for the R-60? Trying to figure out some early MiG21bis loadouts and I wonder what usually went with the R-55...