zerO_crash

I can confirm that it´s after loading the aircraft after mission start. I always start missions with empty loadouts, and therefore it always occurs then. Surprisingly enough, I couldn´t replicate the bug with a hot-started aircraft that was loaded prior to mission start. Also, I will point this out again, it didn´t happen before with KOM´s, only OFP2´s, but it would be nevertheless good if the team checked the other variants as well. Cheers :)

Got it @BIGNEWY, attached trk. file with the issue. You can see at the end that with irregular shooting, meaning incomplete sequences from short trigger pulls, some rockets remain in the pods. At the very end, before landing, I try to squeeze the trigger to no avail. server-20200422-104224.trk

If you mean the N2 turbine trim switch on the collective then here is the answer from a real Mi17 (Mi8/17 being the same regarding flight technique and flight dynamics, if the engines are the same that is) pilot: "The N2 trim switch is only used to get the N2 setting on the engine trimmed to the right spot, it's not something that is used after that. We set it before the first takeoff by pulling the collective (without taking off) until the collective pitch angle shows 3 degrees, then using the trim switch to set the rotor speed at 95%. We don't touch it again unless we notice that during cruise flight the rotor speed is creeping up above 95%, in which case we'll trim it down to 95%. I can't recall ever having to trim it up from below 95% in cruise. That setting can be used to cheat a few extra percent of rotor speed but it won't make any difference when you are actually pulling in a lot of power. In other words, if the engine is temp or N1 limited already, beeping up the rotor speed with that trim switch will have no effect." Hope it helps ;)

I don´t ask him to be a pro coder either. But he should be able to feel out the plane and compare it to IRL. If the FM change is closer to the real one, sure update it. But with the major fm changes we have had since the beginning, they have all acted so different that they are pulling the plane in different performance spectrums each time. Why release a fm update that pulls us further away from it. It would be nice to have him comment whether this is really how MiG21Bis is supposed to feel. (Somehow I doubt it, as the plane handles in some flight-regimes as if it was a su27 or MiG29). Also, if F4U Corsair is priority list, because it can fix their financial problems, well then this issue will drag itself forever with something always lagging behind. They as devs have an obligation to us customers who have paid for it. I didn´t pay for MiG21Bis to have them abort it mid way to release the F4U. (Not saying this is the case, but if it´s true what you state, then that´s my answer to it). I somehow don´t think they have abandoned it, as the cockpit received newly updated in-cockpit lightning. Not sure if a priority or not, but it should be a minimum requirements that it´s fm be updated once and for all, with rather minor updates over time, before F4U... That´s what I would consieder a competent business choice, considering that your potential future F4U buyers could be your former MiG21Bis buyers. See my point? ;) I don´t either understand their silence. We are not here to mock anyone, rather as customers, ask for some two-way communication. Surely they must know we will compare them as a dev to other 3rd party devs. It is impossible not to. It´s like eating food at different restaurants and not comparing them. I am not saying either that they have to explain themselves every update they make, but the fm is critical in DCS, and with so many changes, we have never really gotten any statements as to why so much changes each time they tweak.

No worries, I had it happen recently. I will make sure to get a trk. file of it within a short time :thumbup:

First and foremost people, stop the rude behaviour, this is not a children´s community, there are grownup fan´s of military aviation here. To be elite you have to act like it, especially to new ones who didn´t read forum rules, do so! Now, I have to admit that the new FM is not the best, MiG-21Bis has seen better times, some of the best flight models were the very first ones when the module came out (by Leatherneck Simulations back then, before the split). It really surprises me to see such a major change in the FM, when it is atleast the 3rd major revamp of the FM. It does feel different, but not in a good way. What really get´s at me though, is that the team should have all the resources it should need, with Novak - Dolphin887 who actually has flown this aircraft. I just cannot understand that we keep getting such major FM changes with the MiG21Bis, that it doesn´t land at a final FM with some fine tuning here and there. I believe that M3 owes an explanation here as to what is going on, especially to all of us who have been there from the start and before. To add it on the side note, one of the many threads I opened about MiG21Bis right at it´s release was about the missing pilot-body in cockpit. Back then I was promised "next patch". It is now a couple years later, with VR and a missing pilot body, which ruins immersion. This along with the aforementioned leads me to believe that either things are not working as they should within the team or the module is not a priority. Quite honestly, everyone here has paid money for the module and done their part of the deal, the rest is up to you M3. That is to bring a fully functioning module. It´s now so many years since release, that such a basic thing as FM should have been settled a long time ago. Again, harsh words, but that is from a fan who has been waiting since release, and if I may speak for colleagues in the community, not only me but us all. I guess you should update us on what is going on right now, and how you plan to tackle this, cause the new FM is so different that one starts to doubt if you will ever settle down for a realistic FM or if we will have everything from a Ka50 to M2000C in one and the same MiG21Bis. Christen Eagle is cool and all, but you got a MiG21Bis to finish. Pretty please, with sugar on top ;) That said, there have been many good updates as well, eg. ASP-17. It´s just that FM should be above all I suppose. It´s not so fun to fly a different plane every "little" FM upgrade ;)

This has really bothered me some time now. Having conferred with a couple pilots of Mi8, I generally got their opinions on how they fly the real MI8s and MI17s. Now, what I notice from their descriptions of actual flying of these helicopters is the PTIT temperatures they mention. They do not reflect the temperatures that are in accordance to the MI8 in DCS or it´s manual. I pulled up some docs that are widely available on MI8s and Mi17s, keeping in mind that I am looking for the models with the specific engine we have in our MI8MTV2, namely the Izotov TV3-117VM! Having compared the engine limitations graphs, I cannot help but wonder why we are so much handicapped on the PTIT in DCS? I will add two pictures, one is from the DCS manual and the other one is from a real Mi17 manual, which I can provide on request. It occurs to me that although similar in performance, somehow our MI8 is is handicapped to the point where at cruise flight, to be able to stay within the limits of the engine, you cannot pull above 10 angle of attack on the collective otherwise you run it too hot for unlimited cruise mode. That`s 10 out of 15 AOA. Not that this should be a comparison, but it is pretty crazy, you pass the temperature limits in no time. Take a look at for example cruise 1 in the pictures. While the real life PTIT temperature is permitted 910*C (later in the manual it`s stated as unlimited duration), our DCS manual states for "Max LTD Cruise" 855*C (taking the highest value here with PSS). That is 55*C difference between the real engines and our, making it sometimes impossible to follow the real flight instructions where pilots claim that they fly unlimited cruise duration at 860 to 870 PTIT. Also, while we are at this, another instrument that I guess should be relevant for propper real life engine operation would be the EPI (engine pressure ratio). You will never reach even the "K" pressure index before the PTIT limits you. And although this is confirmed by multiple pilots of the MI8/17 I´ve talked with, one being an active member here in DCS community and on the forums, I still wonder then why this gauge is here at all, when it will absolutely never be the limiting factor in the MI8, unlike Ka50 which is flown solely by EPR and PTIT.

This is still an issue, can the devs actually come with a statement as to whether this is a bug or if this is as Mole says a sequence timing issue? Thx in advance

Now there are multiple treads on this, and some dating all the way back to when Mirage 2000C was released. I remember we pretty much had inaccurate bombing ever since Mirage 2000C was released. Well I noticed recently, when playing with AG during low-high winds a certain inconsistency. When you compare Matras to Gun, keeping the same approach parameters and distance from the target, it occurs to me that even during a crosswind-attack, the gun is 100% accurate, whereas Matras are not. And it strikes me because if anything, rockets will always be more accurate and less susceptible to wind because of their weight, speed and longer-lasting thrust. In other words, if things were correct, it should be the other way around; gun-rounds that fall off target, rather than Matras. As it stands right now, if you fire Matras crosswind, they will hit anywhere outside of where the pipper is aiming at, and that from ranges of 3,5km down to as little as 1km. This cannot be correct... I would like to hear from the devs what their take is on the issue. In comparison, BLG-66´s have gotten perfectly accurate, and it´s funny, because when they are released, in the same conditions as mentioned above, they hit the target. Bear in mind, they are clusters, but the target is always in the middle of the cluster-carpet. Which means they hit where the CCIP-pipper predicts they will, and they do so very accurately. It simply doesn`t add up that a unguided rocket would be more inaccurate than a dumb bomb... Finally, as has been mentioned, both MK82´s and MK82SE´s have a surprising high inaccuracy level. Now I don`t neccesarily doubt this is the case, but if anything, I am surprised that it would be this inaccurate. If you compare them, currently the Mig21Bis is a more accurate bombing platform than Mirage 2000C. I don`t generally compare modules like that, but it surprises me that Mirage doesn´t have systems to more accurately deploy unguided bombs than a 3rd gen plane. Bombs, especially during winds, just don´t hit anywhere near where they are designated to hit. And again, to compare to BLG-66, if MK`s are correctly modelled, why would there be such a discrepancy in accuracy between these three types (BLG-66 vs MK82/MK82SE? Bottom line, are the currently simulated weapons or the sights/pippers in Mirage 2000C complete and final? Do you feel they represent the Mirage 2000C as in reality? If so that´s fine, all I want to know is how realistic this is. I hope to get an answer from the devs on this, so please refrain from pulling the discussion in unnecessary directions. I know my tactics, this is not a "how do I do X thread". Also, I am fully aware of the pipper being displaced roughly 7 pixels south. The main discrepancy here comes from weapons reaction to wind, it´s simply unpredictable. Thanks in advance

I notice that the upper front mirror in the Mirage 2000C is somewhat displaced from the position I used to remember it. It used to look straight back at the wings and weaponpylons. So my question for the devs is if you can possibly align it in VR so that you see your whole face/aircraft-wings from the default seat height, or eventually, if you can make the mirror tiltable/with more positions. It`s really a small thing, but for us in VR makes a whole lot of difference to the immersion, pretty much like the pilot body.

yes Besides, rockets are fired from all pods. Problem being that some rockets remain in some of them.

Try loading 6x OPF2`s and see if it works. For me, it seems that KOM`s work good, but OFP2`s don`t. Try using up all and maybe reloading and trying a second run. Tends to block for me after 1st run or so, but haven`t really found a pattern. Anyways, I wouldn`t be making a report if it was a non issue.

How long is this issue going to persist? Will it ever get fixed? I have had this problem for years. Please fix it! Either a texture bug or some rockets are still left in the pods. Please notice that when I fire, I don't hold in the trigger until the sequence of rockets get`s finished. Rather, I click and fire irregularly 1-3 rockets each time. Maybe the problem lies here. I have a track but too big to post. If desired I can make a short track with this issue.

Been wanting this since BS1 really, but seeing all the updates taking place nowadays, would it be possible to add an option to loadout of Ka50 so as to be able to select how many vikhrs one wants APU-6 rack? In many missions I find it that even a single APU-6 carries more vikhrs than I need for a typical mission. There are pictures and videos where Ka50`s were carrying for example 2 vikhrs on each wing in Chechnya.

I don`t have any problems on my side, runs silky smooth.

Fantastic, thanks much :thumbup:

Figured it, seems it was an older mission that doesn't get all updates, even after resaving. Problem solved.

Yes, I have. Considering temperature, pressure and crosswind yields different results depending on where you fly.

Well 20mm bullets are no small beast, but I guess things will add up once we have the updated damage model :)

I got no problems at all. Combat or not, auto cooling-flaps (why do you even run them open???). Must be on your side. Either you are not heating up the engine before taxi, or you are skipping out on something else. Are you running at too slow speed when at higher RPM (2500rpm+ at 300km/h-?). Also, problem was never there before. It was people that didn`t do warmups before until the engine simulation was updated and requiring it. If you don´t preheat the engine, then it`s typical that it shows cool temperature shortly after takeoff and all of a sudden explodes with the needle for coolant temp shooting off scale.

Without recording anything, since some time ago, I noticed that there is a difference in Mig21 in 1.5.5 and 2.1.1. The difference lies in thrust, where Mig21 just accelerates slower in 2.1.1. I feel that in manoeuvres in general the Mig21 has more thrust in 1.5.5. Can you have a look at this Dolphin, or someone in Magnitude?

Bis NEVER used RS-2US because it could not. RP-22SMA (or 22 in general) in beam mode shoots two beams, one being offset a couple degrees down. The seeker of RS-2US and in fact KH-66 is adjusted for a single beam. Meaning that if fired, and you`d try to guide the missile, it would go like a pendulum between the two beams until it either flew completely off the gimbals of both beams, or only managed to stay with one. So no, it would not work. Fantasy loadouts on Mig21Bis are following: RN-24/28, RS-2US, KH-66, SPS pod, Gunpods. These are confirmed both by devs and real life sources. Nothing to argue about. Enough derailing.

Awesome :thumbup:

YAY F18C Subforum, wohoo

2.5 is coming this year. Don`t worry, it all takes time due to many reasons, but generally that it`s all quality simulator. We waited for some 5-6 years for 1.5 alone. We`ll get there. For those who don`t read cyrrillic, Chizh confirms that 2.5 will be this year. Keep in mind that Strait of Hormuz is in the works as well as some sea/land map from Heatblur (wanted to say LN duh).