Jump to content

Kobymaru

Members
  • Posts

    113
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

Personal Information

  • Flight Simulators
    DCS Mig-21Bis
  • Location
    Austria

Recent Profile Visitors

The recent visitors block is disabled and is not being shown to other users.

  1. The issue is still there for me with 2.9.3. At least core 8 trick still works, but I'm getting a bit tired of it, ngl. Any news on this? Still a bit boggled by the lack of updates for an issue that affects many players on newer-gen CPUs.
  2. What does the Gaming mode do, and how is it different from the realistic mode?
  3. You mean like this? https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.io/view.php?id=1139
  4. Here you go: Please also note that this is just one log among many logs in this thread with similar hardware (12th-gen/13-th gen intel).
  5. This issue is half a year old. At this point in time, I was kinda hoping for a "workaround" built into the game by ED themselves. Seen a lot of new stuff in the DCS news like Vulkan, Dynamic campaign, ... how is that going to work out if MT craps out on pretty common hardware?
  6. It seems to be horizon stabilized in low-altitude mode, but in my interpretation not in regular mode.
  7. Good find! This helped me find the corresponding section in the english MiG-21 manual: Looks like this is specific to the context of the Low Altitude mode. Is it in the same context in the polish version? The reason why I thought it is stabilized only in the roll axis is this: https://www.mig-21-online.de/mig-21/funkmessvisier/fmv-beschreibung/ translation A similar section is from this document (page 17,18) https://archive.org/details/RP-21_Sapfir_radar_technical_manual/RP-21M -MA technical description/ Bit strange that they emphasize roll stabilization but make no mention of pitch stabilization. Either way, doesn't seem like it 100% clear which way it's supposed to work.
  8. Thanks for your input! I tried to do some digging and you're right that it is stabilized in roll with ±70° in roll. However, I could not confirm the pitch stabilization. Do you have a source for this information?
  9. Dear Rudel, please don't put false words into peoples mouths. Your last statement about what "caring" means for users is simply not true. "Caring" for a module means that you fix bugs and issues that are known or discovered along the way. This not about adding new missiles or new variants or completely redesigning the damage model. This is about a large number of small and big bugs that have been known for a long long time. This includes trivial things like not resetting radar/alcohol when rearming and more complex things like the completely broken ASP logic. You can compare the rate of bugfixes to other modules. And if you do that, you will see that some receive fixes just about every patch, some receive fixes sometimes, some receive fixes almost never. And it is OK to call the latter category "abandoned"! You don't have to take this as a personal attack that you need to defend from, it just is what it is. Words have a meaning, and it's ok to call a module with a huge list of bugs that haven't been touched in 9 years "abandoned". So I kindly ask you to stop policing this forum like the defender of the mediocre and try to make everyone lower their standards. Let me quote you something from the official ED store where you can buy this module: What do you think users are entitled to after buying this module? Personally, I believe I am entitled to the most accurate and comprehensive simulation of a supersonic jet fighter with fully simulated systems, interactive cockpit and advanced flight modeling that will provide you with the most authentic simulation possible. Naive, I know, but I am a naive person like that who likes to hold people and companies to their promises. And I believe I still have not received "the most authentic simulation possible", not just in the pedantic literal sense, but also within the realms of what should be possible for a small developer in the span of 9 years. Do these modifications pass the Integrity Checks on multiplayer servers? If not, then this "solution" is not relevant.
  10. Out of curiosity, what is Phase I? And if there is one, what is Phase III?
  11. According to the MiG-21 DCS manual and any other source I could find, the radar of the MiG-21 is supposed to be fixed. If the radar can not be moved, then these limits should be relative to the aircraft axis and not the horizon. Because why should the radar care about the horizon if its fixed and pointed along the axis? This is not the case in DCS. You can easily verify this yourself by flying behind a target and slightly below, then pull your nose up so that it points way above the target, and observe how the radar contact does not disappear until you have climbed significantly above the target. In this screenshot, I am about 150 below the target before I pull up the nose. You can observe that the target is way below the small aiming cross which is -26.5 mrad = -1.5° which should signify the lower limit of the radar. Specifically, we're at around -110 mrad = 6.3° ! We can happily aim at targets 6.3° below our centerline as long as we're below it. The same situation but reversed happens when you fly above, and then point your nose downwards. Here, I pointed my nose at the target and kept it ABOVE the centerline, which should make the target appear on the radar. It does not appear, until my altitude is almost the same as the targets altitude. Assuming that the radar is fixed to the horizon, then if you are 5km behind the target, this means that the lowest the target can be is sin(1.5°)*5000m = 130m below your altitude and the highest the target can be is sin(17°)*5000m = 1460m above your altitude. You can verify that this is approximately the altitude difference at which the contact starts disappearing, completely regardless of your aircraft attitude. An even more fun way to verify this is flying inverted. Here, the target is CLEARLY far below -1.5°. It is also to the LEFT, relative to my current (inverted) attitude, but to the RIGHT relative to a level upright attitude. The radar shows the target on the right. Hopefully the radar will get some attention for the rework. Here's a track file to make bignewy and nineline feel better:mig21-horizon-radar.trk
  12. Same here. I don't need F4U or Christian Eagle or WW2 marianas, I just want MiG-21 that is up to 2023 standards.
  13. I think most here are in agreement. But it's all down to Rudel. He said he's busy with F4U right now, and MiG-21 rework is "planned" after the F4U release, whatever that means. So maybe 2028?
  14. Pulled too many g's after pulling out of a gun dive, so my wing went missing. But not to worry! Approaching Krymsk after a casual 50km flight. Tis but a scratch! Ok I admit, flight was a bit wonky. Had to give a lot of right aileron the entire flight, I wonder why.
  15. The funniest thing about this bug is that you can still somewhat fly the plane. Once I managed to land in one piece after getting a wing torn off.
×
×
  • Create New...