Sleksa

I think you've let your emotions get ahead of your reading comprehension. I've stated several times that I'm completely fine with the mig-21 being at a distinct disadvantage against the likes of F-15. I'm also completely fine with getting shot down while flying it. I'm also fine with the fight being even tougher if that's how it would be in the real world. It's obviously the nature of things when a older interceptor is going up against a newer air superiority fighter. I'm also by no means excluding my flying to the mig alone (but thanks for the condescending assumptions), dedicating a portion of my flight time to the FC3 aircraft, some to helicopters, some to ground attackers and some to the mig. I have no personal investment on the subject and I'm fine with whatever they do with the mig's weapons (including leaving it as it is, as currently there's likely several bigger things LNS should direct their focus on such as the mig digging itself into the runway). What I'm not fine with is a Buzz Killington coming in to say the overall effort to score a kill on the mig is nullified because one of it's weapon is flying with incorrect parameters. The mig might enjoy some unfair/unrealistic advantage of the R-3 missile performing better than it's real life counterpart, I agree, but when you look at the overall process, firing the weapon and having it travel to the target is only a part of the overall process of shooting down your opponent. Even if you discredit the entire part about the weapon traveling to the target, in the event that the mig pilot does score a kill on a fc3 aircraft, the pilot's capacity to pull every other aspect of the flight including avoiding the enemy, maneuvering into position and acquiring the target on a (again, rightfully) inferior platform deserve some form of a thumbs up as he's gotten into a advantageous position by starting at a disadvantageous initial condition.

DCS might be the best aerial combat simulator there is on the market, but that doesn't mean that everything inside it is representing real life. From the very basics such as ATC communications, things are massively simplified or outright wrong. Other fine examples include things like a solitary A-10A jamming every single fighter's radar inside a 300+ KM radius while sitting squarely on the runway, ARMs not needing different seeker-heads against different threats, ECM in general affecting every single system, outdated or state of the art at the same flat value, missile performances, weather conditions, effectiveness of Flares being a constant value over all IR seeking missiles and so on. The ideal state of DCS is to represent the real life as close as possible, but only extremely limited amount of things currently inside DCS are close to this level. And singling out the mig-21 due to it's R-3R missile's performance (and again, I haven't seen any documentation towards any side of the argument) is a rather negative stance to take, especially when the mig-21 as a whole product/package is spectacularily close to the real thing. And again I'm not arguing that learning some button flicking sequences makes the mig pilot somehow better from the rest of the people, but rather that it's silly to single out the mig pilot as having an unfair advantage when every plane in the game enjoys the same advantages at varying degrees (except, seemingly the F-15)

The question and my argument is not simply about some button pushing, but I can see why you'd rather single a easy interpretation of the whole argument and argue against it, rather than the whole point itself as this seems like a very emotional topic. The point I was making is not about whether a plane has buttons you can click on in the cockpit, but rather the mix of simplification and high fidelity in one setting. The aerial Quake argument might've been too provocative, I admit, but I doubt you can say with a straight face that the the current F-15 we have is at sufficiently high level of fidelity, comparable to aircraft like the mig-21 or a-10, and you can't deny the fact that it gives the pilot of a simpler aircraft an advantage (the extent of which can be argued to infinity) due to the reduced need to focus on flying the plane itself, no matter how automated the majority of processes are on the real thing. I'll state it again more clearly. I understand that the Mig-21 is older and inferior to the F-15, but that's not what's eating me, it's the above-mentioned advantage gained from simplifying the aircraft, no matter what level of automation the plane has, all the while belittling the achievements of the underdog by turning a blind eye to the FC3 aircraft's advantages and focusing on a single aspect of the mig-21 that may or may not be working better than it should be (I'm not an expert and I've seen no documentation one way or another on the performance, but would love to see if there is any). As for the R-3R, if it is performing too well, I'd warmly welcome an adjustment to make it behave more like the real life one, just as I'd warmly welcome a more close-to-reality F-15, or ECM modelling, a more thorough mission editor (patrolling waypoints as a example), weapon damage modeling and so on and so on. The fact is though, that this is a really tiny market with a extremely demanding playerbase, with more projects being cancelled than finished. In this regard I'm completely fine with having minor issues such as the missile's performance (and even more fine with them being adjusted closer to reality provided it doesn't provide excessive workload on the developing team), when I zoom out of the missile and focus on the whole package that we have with a extensive list of weaponry, radio/navigation systems and even the radar and it's various operating modes, coolants and so on. All that is where the future of DCS lies to me, with a seemingly promising start of the 2016 with the tomcats, eurofighters, mirages and other planes hopefully gradually overtaking the legacy touch 'n go fighters from flaming cliffs. And even then I'll still share tsb47's sentiment and applaud any mig that bags up a fancier fighter, and call anyone claiming it was only due to some missile's flight mechanics being different from the real life a, genuine scrooge mcduck :pilotfly:

If you truly believed what you said about the realism being the #1 priority, you wouldn't even be discussing about modern fighters as currently there are none available in DCS. Instead, what we have is a couple of planes that can take to the sky by pressing 2 buttons (L & R engines on, don't even need power) with as much depth and complexity as the fighters in the battlefield game series. This coupled with the fact that the F-15, while being the most simplistic, is also by far the most powerful pilotable plane in the game skewes the online experience into stale homogenuity where nobody wants to get into a combination of massive artificial (simplicity) and realistic (radar+amraams) disadvantage. This is quite plain to see by recording a few hours of gameplay on the popular player vs player servers such as 104'th, with the vast majority of fighter planes being F-15's. In this regard and strictly in the context of the DCS itself, the mig-21 player who manages to kill a modern fighter in a online environment is not delusional (and I can't imagine why you'd ever take such a hostile stance) but rather simply more skilled, either mechanically (faster radar locking, notching etc) or knowledge wise (better emission discipline, better decisionmaking on for example when to run and when to fight) or both. From the same perspective, the missile performance that you argue gives the mig-21 an unfair edge is in my opinion a completely moot point as every single aspect about every single modern fighter in the game is closer to playing an aerial version of quake instead of a aerial combat simulator.

Thanks, so I can set it up in the monitorsetup folder as a lua file now. However the second part of adding a toggle on/off option still remains open until I can find some documentation on the possible commands to put into the monitorsetup lua file

Hello. I'm wondering if it's possible to fixate the radar picture to the screen same way as people are fixating mfcd's on the a-10, but with the added twist of making it on/off toggleable like the 'show controls indicator'- screen. The reasoning for this is that I don't have a second screen or trackir- kind of systems available which makes tracking the radar as well as keeping my eyes on the target an impossible task currently and leaves me at a disadvantage against the people who do run said setups. While browsing through the various lua files I found that going into the hud-only view (lalt+f1) already gives this exact radar screen which I'd like to be able to toggle and export into the cockpit view, however I'm unsure on how to actually do this and what the necessary lua command lines are.

To me the excitement is about the possibilities of what it can bring to the dcs: -Second high fidelity fighter (after mig-21) -Double cockpit -Swept wings -Interesting weapon choices -Possible A/G radar

Wasn't the tomcat also able to use the lantrin pods which had some kind of a ground mapping radar?

There's a way to deactivate them on the MiG-21?

If they actually start a project for the F-14, I'll be buying up every module LN makes as appreciation for bringing such a iconic plane to DCS.

This would make the 101CC the first anti-ship platform in the game, and the sea-eagle seems like a interesting weapon to use as well with the target programming.

What makes you so sure that the F-16 would have a better radar and/or performance than the mig-23? As far as I remember, they did a rather decent job in shooting down the F-16's in Syrian hands :).

I've had similiar cases even with repetitive IFF toggles and the resetting of radar

That's pretty much it. In real life you can't really jump out to a bird's eye view after you're dead to see what happened, but with this tool you can do exactly that, which makes it a really powerful tool for learning and improving. I use it to see what really happened during the flight. For example today I was flying the mig-21 on a MP session thinking that I was being chased by a phantom fighter with the RWR going crazy all the time and thought I got shot by a flanking fighter while going for a guns kill. After I opened up the session in tacview I saw that in reality I wasn't being chased by anyone but had strayed close enough to the enemy airbase for their S300's to fire at me. Judging ingame what went wrong during a fight is a lot harder to deduce, especially in a plane like the mig which gives no fancy rwr information. Comparatively like in the first paragraph, getting the bird's eye view of the situation you can see exactly how effective your decisions were and what you should've done. It can be best illustrated with the following pictures. What you see ingame is this: And what really happened is this:

I've been flying with the mig for a while now and mostly getting shot down while trying to go for the enemy fighters. This evening I got lucky with it though. After a few failed attempts, I managed to sneak up on a su-27 and fire 3x r-3's but he was too agile and managed to out-turn the missiles, prompting me to afterburn away like a coward. After a few minutes I thought I was being chased by a enemy fighter with the RWR going on and off 24/7 (when in reality I was close enough to enemy airfield for their s-300's to fire at me). Oblivious that i had a truck-size missile coming at me and thinking I was still being chased by a phantom F-15, I Managed to get a sneak on 2 su-27's and down one of them with the last remaining R-3 while also going for a gun-kill on the second but a second before a good gun solution I got slammed down by a S-300 :cry:. The end of the flight against the su-27 and s-300's can be seen here: http://www.twitch.tv/sleksa/c/5559702

This might be it. I basically just extracted the file and drag&dropped it into the packed file with no further promt, but I'll try creating the folder MiG-21_Cockpit when I get home to see what happens. I also opened the modified files as well as the original file from a backup with GIMP's dds plugin and it only showed opaque and what I assume to be the target size / angle numbers from the wheels to the left and right of the ASP in 2 separate layers, but couldn't find the added changes anywhere in the picture's layers. Is GIMP's .dds plugin unable to open the file properly or am I missing something? I'd love to further add to your work some personally relevant info on the ASP along with the pylons and t/o speeds like max/effective ranges of the weapons and MP target's wingspans (a10, su's, migs, f-15). EDIT: Indeed placing the files into a MiG-21_cockpit folder seems to have made it work, however I still can't get them open in GIMP :noexpression:

Is it possible to purchase a module from the E-shop and activate it on the steam- installed version of the DCS world?

The conversion paper is still in front of the asp when I tried Mainstay's and Chazz_bmf's versions, however the tape of 'natalya' was still visible slightly underneath the conversion paper.

Will these apply to Steam as well or is this a e-shop exclusive?

Scratch this post. I have been a massive idiot :). The acmi files for some reason are being generated in the C:\Users\name\Saved Games\DCS folder instead of the spesified folder. Now that I've found where they are I can see all the tracks that've been made and they play out properly. Thank you for the hard work you've put into this as it really is a powerful tool to better oneself.

The ECM and the IR-jammer are fixed in the open beta patch and display that they're on in the HUD as well as with a audible clicking sound

This seems like a neat tool, however I can't get it to work at all. What I did was download it, install and tick 'record dcs world flights'. I then went into multiple sessions but never noticed the tacview doing anything, nor is there anything on the my documents/tacview folder. I then checked the manual installation list in here: http://lomac.strasoftware.com/tacview-dcs-en.php and everything checked out. I've tried both open beta and normal as well as running both programs as admin privilege for no effect. Opening other tracks like the tacview-demo-blackshark still works though. A link to a track is available here: https://dl.dropboxusercontent.com/u/84160163/tacview_test.trk

By the nature of the area the video was taken in it could also possibly be a barrel of a zu-23/ ztpu that's been modified as a rifle of sorts. Similiar footage of modified snipers made of those weapon's barrels have appeared from Syria before.

Same. A well modelled modern air-air fighter is completely lacking for now in DCS and I consider it a necessity for a "digital military aircraft battlefield simulation". I'll be buying it as soon as possible for the sheer virtue of being the only modelled "modern" fighter.

This matter is told in the tutorial if I remember but the gist of it is this: http://i.gyazo.com/a4150d1c981df89f7474ce4805daf872.png On the #1 circle is the weapon selector dialer. The left panel is used for both rockets and bombs top one for kh-66 and s-24 and the right one for anti-air missiles (both radar and ir seeking). The right side on the left panel (4-8-16 RKT) means how many rockets are fired from each rocket pod with one release weapon pressing. The left side on the other hand chooses which pylons to drop bombs from (1 through 4 or 1-2 or 2-4 only) Once you select the type you want, you flick the switch #2 into either shooting (up) or bombing (down) position. Thus if we want to fire 8 rockets per press, the whole process is as follows, set air/ground switch to ground, set weapon dialer to 3-4 / 8 on the left side, set gun/launch (of carried weapons) switch to launch, select shooting and you're ready to shoot rockets (provided you have the pylon powers and master arms on) Or if we want to drop bombs from only outer racks the process is as follows: set air/ground switch to ground, set weapon dialer to 3-4 / 8 on the left side, set gun/launch switch to launch, select bombing and you're ready to release the bombs (again, provided you have the power and master arm switches on)