Bogey Jammer

If it's true, it is a can of worm. Another realism issue again for the MiG-21bis avionics…

Due to the age of the static weather engine, I believe that the wind speed is linearly interpolated between the layers. I suggest you switch to dynamic generation. Because from point A to point B, I'm pretty sure that to wind conditions along the route are too changing anyway. Wind speed prediction is surely a sad compromise.

The interpretation of this part is indeed confusing but I've always understood from official sources that this theater will be payware.

You're wrong. Air superiority is not about the aircraft only. It is actually very similarly used like a Su-27 designed as an interceptor too. The Mirage 2000C in the early 1980 had top tier missiles and maneuverability. It has nothing to be ashamed of compared to contemporary Soviet and US equipment except the radar because of the small form factor. But it was not designed to patrol alone over a big Siberia or a Pacific ocean, however it is highly effective with team work and good ground control.

Oh man you're right :D My bad I've not paid enough attention to it. Now it may be feature complete for me now :music_whistling:

Wasn't it missing ?

The éclair pod maybe… tbh I don't give a shit about it. The rest could be IFF and ECM but it is a DCS issue

There is no real major issue with this module. It feels complete enough. The main issue is the manual (definitively not Belsimtek grade) but the training missions and the campaign are one of the best for learning all the essential things. FM ? pfff come on it's not the only module struggling with it. You shouldn't notice anything wrong if you fly it as intended anyway. Most of the discussion is not about your initial question, I suggest you don't pay attention to these parts. Finally, you may watch gameplay videos and see if it fits your taste. Liking the aircraft alone is not sufficient as it turns out for me that it's not my favorite module because of its too long startup sequence (INS), its over-optimization of ergonomics (I need some challenge like the soviet airplanes, Dassault is too good) the BVR gameplay, the almost nonexistent multi-role capability, and the incomplete information available about the aircraft's systems.

Come on guys, the MiG-21 got bug fixes for every patch since the split !! See by yourselves: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=147601&page=5 We never saw that when you considered the module "active"

Dear skin makers, Since I like to create realistic missions, and I'm not very well documented about F/A-18 versions and users, can you specify in the skin's name if it is not a F/A-18C skin. It would save me a lot of research time.

I don't see any reason to be more worried by the state of the MiG-21 than DCS 2.1 which looks pretty immature. I'll only buy the Normady theatre when a solid 2.5 version will come out. Until then, it's a waste of user's money and patience (a lot more), and a waste of development time for third parties. Magnitude 3 is currently trying to absorb the Leatherneck split shockwave. It wouldn't sound unnatural to me if they are sorting more important things other than chasing beta bugs for a beta version of the main sim.

You'd better to report the issue at the official bugtracker: https://leatherneck-sim.mantishub.io/my_view_page.php

Perso je n'ai jamais été déçu par la traduction.

Dude, the lesson of FSX is about a software that everybody had to buy. Whatever the product was good or bad, people just wanted it. So M$ saved money by not optimizing the software because some people said things like: Please don't talk for everyone, I'm sure most of us don't like it this way… Hopefully, HB doesn't seem to be that kind of profit only oriented company.

Such overenthusiastic consumer logic made FSX's poor performances to happen… never again they said after that :lol:

Like if we don't instinctively this… thanks for that smart comment… There is nothing to believe before the optimization is done and successful, and before we see by ourselves. Currently it's (commercial) anticipation words working effectively on you according to your attitude. Yes, but unfortunately the new hardware doesn't come as fast as the requirements. So here comes the question: Is it worth to create ultra demanding content that only a few of us will fully enjoy anyway, or sync both the current and legacy content as the affordable technology evolves ?

Godlike work That said, I'm also worried about that that quality set a too high standard compared to the core of DCS and the other modules. Not to mention hardware performance issues. I already struggle to run DCS smoothly with my Rift which will hopefully never need so fine details. Anyway if HS is the master of artwork here, can they be hired by ED to help them to reduce the depressive rate of old 3D models updates ? and/or why not DCS engine performance optimization ?

DCS_updater_exe cleanup and repair doesn't help. But this: is definitely the best solution. Have to do it during every DCS launch though. EDIT: It's an even easier and more effective fix indeed :D

My TrackIR 3 pro sensor only works when its application is running. I don't know about TIR 4 & 5.

About the AI combat behavior, yes it can only be observed. I start to plan their mission just before their attack, then gradually add threats. When it looks OK, the torturing part comes: finish the rest of their flight plan, this is what I'm talking about.

Yeah that sounds crazy… And may not get any echo… But it would save a crazy amount of time while creating missions to setup AI routes, altitudes and speeds, by learning how each aircraft behaves depending on load-out and the aircraft's special abilities. I'm currently tired to run/exit the mission all the time to find a correct setup for AI cruise, or a sync alt+speed point for refueler and refueled. Aircraft such as the MiG-25 has a weird performance and doesn't seem to be able to reach any speed at high altitudes without using afterburner, and I've never found out if it was normal and what is the logic here. So it would be purely about flight dynamics, no need for testing the weapon system except the simulation of weapon release for keeping drag/loss of weight influence on the flight.

I should have read every page… but did it already happen ?

Top Gun 2 will never happen The current cultural context is highly toxic for that theme and male promoting style. If something based on military aircraft has to be made, 'murrica would be out of the question. Filming live action is now forbidden in big productions by insurance, money issues, legal issues… No more Bullit, Le Mans, Top Gun filming styles. What made nowaday highly treasured stuff that could not be made otherwise at these times is no longer possible from Hollywood. I'm more fantasizing about something filmed by Russian with real pilots, with real planes, maximum realism for better immersion. The scenario would concentrate on the whole mission alone, from the viewpoint of the multiple concerned operators and even the target itself. Of course, the mission would have to be hard, critical and full of surprises. No need for using plastic looking babes, first class handsome fresh young heroes, grotesque friendship challenges, … It would have a negative feeling about aerial warfare (like Memphis Bell done to me when I was a kid) but doing war is not supposed to be wonderful and enjoyable anyway… Let's face it what we want is all about the aircraft, the rest is decoration.

You have a high post count so I'm wondering if I'm understanding your questions correctly because this looks bizarre. Only general culture about military aviation and related threats can help you here. As a starting point, study the DCS-embedded encyclopedia to learn what is called by each name in the list, then you will be able to discriminate OTAN/other sides from where the machine type is more likely to belong. This is just the beginning, because threat reaction and defensive maneuvers is another topic of its own.

You're right about Kutaisi. http://kutaisiairport.ge/About-Us But your manners are wrong