firmek

I'm almost certain it's a problem with your view settings, most probably incorrect FOV for a wide screen monitor. Changing FOV is a must if changing a monitors with a different aspect ratio.

The AOC monitor is 3440 x 1440, which is the most popular resolution for ultra wide, 34'' monitors. It works perfectly weel so I don't see a big problem with 35''. I think you're exaggerating "a bit". Considering pixel density (pixel/inch): 40'' 4096x3112: ~110 PPI 35'' 3440x1440: ~106 PPI 34'' 3440x1440: ~110 PPI 27'' 1920x1080: ~82 PPI 24'' 1920x1080: ~92 PPI 34'' 3440x1440 is the same as 40'' 4K and better than the most popular 24 and 27 Full HD displays.

Believe me, it's worth it :) Just clean up the garage a bit :) Being more serious. Though I don't know much about AMVA panels, tech spec wise the linked AOC monitor looks interesting. TFT central is a great place to look for a creditable, in-depth reviews: http://www.tftcentral.co.uk/reviews/aoc_agon_ag352ucg.htm You may also check out the Acer X34 predator. Should be the same as linked Asus monitor. Edit: ASUS Designo 34 looks nice. Especially the IPS panel. No G-sync though - not an easy choice considering much lower price. One point however that many pople forget which is also important - the stand. Asus Design has an non-adjustable stand which on top of that looks quite short. If you prefer to have the monitor higher, on the level with your sight rather than watching down this monitor will not be a great option. Unless you want to stack books under the stand.

For sure 34'' over 27''. I did change a 24'' to 34'' monitor and that was a day-night difference in DCS. The extra peripheral vision that 34'' monitor gives is extreamly usefull in DCS as also in other titles (like FPS). Another thing is that the wide screen just feels more natural as humans see more horizontally than vertically. If 34'' monitor than at least 3440x1440. Don't go lower with the resolution. As for other options. G-Sync is IMO a must - at least once you try it out there is no way back (forget the crappy V-Sync, this abomination of technology should have never existed). 100 Hz.. hard to say. Probably not critical with DCS but if you go for a 34'' monitor with G-Sync its safe to assume the panel will be 100hz anyway. If possible get IPS over TN. As an example: https://www.asus.com/us/Monitors/ROG-SWIFT-PG348Q/

I wonder how long the community will bash on that point :doh:. It had been clearly stated by the devs that the Kh-66 should be considered as an extra. Was it added by intention or eventually turned out a misunderstanding of “bis” variant capability doesn't really matter. It's also not that far from reality as it had been used with MiG-21, just with a different variants. Really, get over it. The purists - just don't load the Kh-66. Mission designers can remove the missile if striving for ultimate realistic setup. The missile is a novelty anyway, it doesn't make the bis an unstoppable beast. It's not like we've got an AIM-120C for F-5E.

Soviet abandoned the concpept quite quickly - for a simple reason, it was turning the plane to a really expensive, one time use human piloted missile. After all, the plane had to land after being launched from the rail - so it needed an airfield anyway. Second point was an already ongoing development of misile based air defences (S-25, S-75).

Check another mission. Most probably its the known issue with view settings stored in the mission file, in which case the in-mission view settings are applied on top of user ones. I've seen this issue quite often with the training missions. If you have a direct access to the mission file you can solve the problem by applying procedure as described in Troubleshooting Missings: http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/Snap_views EDIT: Check if you have a option to use the same view settings in all missions (sorry can't remember how it's called exactly) marked as yes. In such case disable it as this option makes your view settings stored into the mission. In result if you're adjusting them you can get the old settings that were saved at the time when the mission was created.

The logic should be connected to the own unit visibility setting on F-10 map. No need to make it a separate setting. Another interesting thing would be how many people are actually using this option. I would say most pople forgot that the option is even there and go to F-10 map to check their position.

+1. Probably the performance gain in this case is barely noticeable but still it's a correct approach to use a truncated 3D model. Something that should be understood is that the in the cockpit view does not use the same model as seen in the external - F2/F3 views. It uses another model with a really simplified representation of the airframe, for the most part having a mesh only for surfaces which can be seen when strapped in the cockpit. I didn’t check the models but I wouldn’t be surprised if most of us are landing without the wheels :lol: The bottom line, the model should stay as it is while the root problem is the ability to stick the head out of the cockpit in unnatural way.

:thumbup: I'm not sure if RB-47 should be a top on priority list for AI modules but I couldn't agree more with your comment. It's hard to over stress it - DCS critically needs ground, air and finally naval AI units from 50's and 60's. There is almost no content for MiG-15 and Sabre. Those from mission creators that didn't gave up and are doing everything possible to create some interesting play-ground for those planes are forced to solutions as using C-130 to portray the B-29... I really hope the situation improves and some of AI units are already worked on in parallel to MiG-19. Otherwise we get yet another module with no proper environment to fly it in. Actually, the ultimate goal should be for DCS to create an immersive air warfare environment simulation - aside of just providing great air frames representation (modules).

Rule no 1: ... ... ... ... Use search: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=179176 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=187229 https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=182094

You do realize that you linked a thread with ASP issue... as a responce to the question how does not having individual sound files makes it broken....

Take it easy :thumbup: The brightness, contrast controls will not make it up for a proper night vision device. Nor it will make the day light sensors work in LLTV-IR spectrum. Note that real CCD device work in a different way than a computer graphics - where increasing the brighness, well just makes the things visible instead of starting to show a screen with more noise. While Ka-50 is a great chopper, Russia struggled for quite long time with developping a night attack capabilities for their combat choppers. One of the main reason was lack of proper electronics. If I'm correct they started to operate night attack capable Ka-50N at and of 90's and later on Mi-28 after 2000.

http://en.wiki.eagle.ru/wiki/Snap_views or just search on youtube for DCS snap views.

:thumbup:. The Ka-50 we have in DCS does not have night attack capabilities :) The brighness/contrast trick with Shkval is basically a cheat :)

It's hard to blame anyone that the module had been developped over the time by three different teams. Quite contrary, it's usually an indication that in result, in the background the software is so to say, difficult to maintain. Which basically means fixes and updates take a lot of effort. Remember that those are also bearly a companies. The reality seems more a group of people doing module development as a second job. I wonder how many people that complain so much do actually have any software development experience. Maybe then they would understand how "easy" piece of a bread it is and that the things they assume should take a day in reality can take a week or a month to do. You're correct that there are inacuracies but from the way you describe the problems "no need of 100% realism to have fun" some could draw a conclusion that MiG-21 is an arcade module - which simply is not true. We need to remember that it's a simulator and while some strive for 100% adequate representation, not evertyghing is possible or doable with a rational amount of investment. There will always be things that are workarounds and which purists will criticise. Finally, there might have been a mistake during an early evaluation in understanding how the things work in reality. It's normal to have an issue with the "requirements". What I think people also forget and stopped to appreciate is that just a few years back a lock-on, flaming clifs was the most advanced and realistic combat simulator available to the public. I would say that MiG-21 is in a state more than good enough to be called a realistic simulation. Especially that those few things not right are mostly not noticable if you don't really go into the real manual (which by the way also quite often doesn't give an ultimate answer and leaves a room for interpretation). What I'm trying to say is that people should stop complaining so much. I see less and less people participating in a constructive in depth criticism - instead there are just more and more general, negative and quite often false statments.

Well said Everyone can find out by going into multi-player server browser that cold war, Mig-21 and F-5 server is constantly in top 5 if not 3 of most most populated servers (after 104th server, BF and free flight, aerobatics server). It is like this since a long time, even before Viggen and Harrier had been added. Surelly MiG-21 gained it's popularity thanks to being utterly broken and rotten with bugs module :doh: Some people are really exaggerating. There really should be a way on the forum to red flag statements like this : Such statements are clearly giving impression to stay away from the module. It's easy to write crap on the forum but think that this will drive some potentiall customer away from purchassing the module - directly affecting developpers revenues and maybe even the stability. Guess what: go to to bug, to do list for some other modules - assuming that they are even pulicly available to begin with. Maybe that'll be a bucket of cold water that will bring you back to the reality :doh: MiG-21 is a great module, absolutelly funcional and usable. It's also one of the most fun to fly . Yes, there are some bugs but none are show-stoppers. Also comparing to other DCS modules there is nothing that would make MiG-21 particullary outsanding from the average in a negative way. Countrary, considering average state of modules in DCS MiG-21 is one of the more complete ones. I think a lot of people are giving M3 a hard time right now due to the announcement of the CE. But that's purelly not fair :furious:

https://www.popularmechanics.com/space/rockets/a15858887/flat-earth-rocket-man-will-take-to-the-sky-in-two-weeks/

You will not have enough space on that drive. I was in the same situation - a 128 GB SDD with Windows only and the DCS would not fit on it. I got a 500 GB SDD for DCS. It was really worth it. DCS loads a lot of data, making upgrade from HDD to SDD a night to day difference. However, frankly speaking, if it's going to be a gaming PC if you still have a possibility I would change the i7 8700 to i5 and get a better GPU - 1070 at least and 1080 if possible.

Look great though I really hope RAZBAM makes a proper bindings for all that 2 and 3 position switches ;)

Just tone the scratches and tint a bit down as the glass is quite worn-out compared to other modules. Makes already difficult spotting even more difficult. "Realistic" is quite subjective in this case. We should consider the overall experience and shortcomings of computer generated graphics. +1. More fresh cockpit would be really nice to have. Just to have an option to choose from. :thumbup: They literally wrote "we are not going to give MiG-23 or MiG-27 to anyone". From this statement forum added apples to oranges using rationalle they are both round and arrived to the point "MiG-23 is under active development by ED - Confirmed!!!" :doh: Well, it’s safe to assume ED wants to keep it for them self but they may as well start to work on the project in 10 years from now. It's really funny how the forum can exaggerate a simple statement based on a wishful thinking.

Created a dedicated thread for MiG-15: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=203088

I thought that I share the list. Question and Answers Q: Does it work? A: Sort of. Most of the switches lack separate up and down actions definition by Belsimtek. In other words, they work but as toggles - player needs to make sure at mission start that in game and real switch are in the same position. That's why most of the bindings have both up and dn action set to the same value equal 1. Request to Belsimtek to define and maintain proper up/dn actions for all of the in-cockpit switches of this great plane! Q: How to install? A: Copy paste into next line after "keyCommands = {" in DCSInstall\Mods\aircraft\MiG-15bis\Input\MiG-15bis\joystick\Throttle - HOTAS Warthog.lua file. Q: Is there a JSGME version available A: No as using JSGME can result in overwriting the updates. It shouldn't be a big issue with MiG-15 though as module is generally not updated. Feel free to create one, I just believe that JSGME is a bad idea with the DCS controllers definition files. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- START Custom Key Commands -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- {down = RSI_6K_commands.Mig15_Command_RSI6K_ReceiveARC_EXT, up = RSI_6K_commands.Mig15_Command_RSI6K_ReceiveARC_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.RSI_6K, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('RSI-6K Radio, RSI-6K Receive/ARC Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = signalflare_commands.Mig15_Command_SignalFlare_switch_EXT, up = signalflare_commands.Mig15_Command_SignalFlare_switch_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.SIGNAL_FLARE_DISPENSER, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Cockpit Side, Signal Flare Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = iCommandPlaneAirBrakeOn, up = iCommandPlaneAirBrakeOff, value_down = 1, value_up = 0, name = _('Systems, Airbrake Switch Open/Close'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- ok {down = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_NearOrFar_EXT, up = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_NearOrFar_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ARC_5, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('AARC-5 Radio Compass, ARC-5 NDB Switch Near/Far'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_Near1_EXT, up = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_Near1_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ARC_5, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('AARC-5 Radio Compass, ARC-5 NDB 1 Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_Near2_EXT, up = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_Near2_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ARC_5, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('AARC-5 Radio Compass, RC-5 NDB 2 Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_Near3_EXT, up = ARC_5_commands.CMD_ARC_5_Near3_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ARC_5, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('AARC-5 Radio Compass, ARC-5 NDB 3 Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_BoosterPump_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_BoosterPump_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, Booster Pump Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = engine_commands.Mig15_Command_IsolatingValve_EXT, up = engine_commands.Mig15_Command_IsolatingValve_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ENGINE_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, Isolating Valve Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_Ignition_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_Ignition_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, Ignition Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_LightsAndInstruments_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_LightsAndInstruments_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, Instruments and Lights Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_TransferPump_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_TransferPump_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, Transfer Pump Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_AirEngineStartSw_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_AirEngineStartSw_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, Air Start Switch'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = navlights_commands.Mig15_Command_NoseLight_EXT, up = navlights_commands.Mig15_Command_NoseLight_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.NAVLIGHT_SYSTEM, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Left Panel, External Lights Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = navlights_commands.Mig15_Command_PositionLights_EXT, up = navlights_commands.Mig15_Command_PositionLights_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.NAVLIGHT_SYSTEM, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Instrument Panel, Nose Light Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = iCommandPlaneGearUp, up = gear_commands.Mig15_Command_LandingGearHandle, cockpit_device_id = devices.GEAR_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 0.5, name = _('Systems, Landing Gear Handle Up/Neutral'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- ok {down = iCommandPlaneGearDown, up = gear_commands.Mig15_Command_LandingGearHandle, cockpit_device_id = devices.GEAR_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 0.5, name = _('Systems, Landing Gear Handle Dn/Neutral'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- ok {down = gear_commands.Mig15_Command_LandingGearHandleCover_EXT, up = gear_commands.Mig15_Command_LandingGearHandleCover_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.GEAR_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Systems, Landing Gear Handle Lock On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = fuel_commands.Mig15_Command_DropTanksSignal_EXT, up = fuel_commands.Mig15_Command_DropTanksSignal_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.FUELSYS_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Central Panel, Drop Tank Signal Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = device_commands.Button_12, up = device_commands.Button_12, cockpit_device_id = devices.WEAPON_SYSTEM, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Central Panel, Tactical Release Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_BatterySw_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_BatterySw_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Accumulator Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_GeneratorSw_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_GeneratorSw_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Generator Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_NoseLight_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_NoseLight_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Nose Light Master Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_Trimmer_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_Trimmer_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Trim Master Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_AGK_DGMK_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_AGK_DGMK_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, AGK-47B Artificial Horizon + DGMK-3 Switch On/Off'),category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_Radio_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_Radio_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Radio Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_Bomb_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_Bomb_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Bombs Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_EmergencyDrop_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_EmergencyDrop_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, Emergency Drop Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_ARC_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_ARC_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, ARC Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_RV2_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_RV2_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, RV-2 Radio Altimeter Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_NR23_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_NR23_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, NR-23 Cannon Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_N37D_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_N37D_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, N-37D Cannon Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_ASP3N_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_ASP3N_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, ASP-3N Gunsight Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start {down = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_PhotoGun_EXT, up = electric_commands.Mig15_Command_CB_PhotoGun_EXT, cockpit_device_id = devices.ELEC_INTERFACE, value_down = 1, value_up = 1, name = _('Right Switches Panel, S-13 Gun Camera Switch On/Off'), category = _('.2/3 Way Switches Abstraction')}, -- experimental, toggle only, align in-cockpit/real keys position at mission start -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- -- END Custom Key Commands -- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Edit: The folder is not "easy" (DCS game mode) version of the input files but the "sim" one.

Flaps is a 4 position switch - not much use of it, you'll have to stay with keys for moving the lever up and down. On top of that, for most of the switches MiG-15 doesn't have a separate on/off action - just toggle. Anyway, I'll share the .lua later on - though for the reason above the bindings don't work fully correct.

Depends on how you define "fun to fly". If you're looking for a plane just to fly, a seat of the pants one than M-2000C would be probably one of the last one on my list. It's mainly due to the fly-by-wire system. For many, L-39 would is a go-to plane for just flying arround. If you're looking for a modern, full fidelity fighter, practicing BFM and AFM then M-2000C does his job really well. Though frankly speaking there is no other options at the moment.