firmek

Things that you can find out on your own: 1. Read the SOP document from BF page (link broken atm, you'll need to get it from some other source). This will give you an indication on where the targets are, what is their role and composition, also how to use F10 menues. If you're flying a plane with possibility to set nav/target points (A-10C, Mirage) you can use the document to make a kneeboard page with GPS coordinates. 2. Open the web page gadged - http://gadget.buddyspike.net/ . From it you'll learn what is the current tactical situation, which locations your coalition owns, which targets are being attacked and which you should defend. 3. While in the server lobby (even before spawning - as spectator) you can see where your coalition is spawning from. This will give you a good indication where your forces are being cumulated - decide if you want to join the main mob or spawn in a place that is uncovered at the moment (see point 5). 4. Check the units that your coalition is flying "'" button - This'll give you a good indication about how many CAP flights there are, how many people fly strikers and how many transport helicopters. Suggestion to join the role that is needed (having 20 people flying CAP, 2 strikers and no transport is not going to get the team anywhere) 5. As above but for enemy spawn location. Together with 2 and 3 you can get a really good understanding of what is going on or what is going to happen. EDIT: you can also use "'" to check enemy coposition - to get even better understanding on what they're up to and which role you can help with. Overall, there is a lot that can be done and you can get an great overview about the situation even before going on coms. 6. Based on above, select your target, role, spawn location. Once in cockpit use the gadget to pick the radio frequency. Use PAK intel to confirm your targets status and overall situation (gadged page can be a bit behind in time).

I'm not sure if was exactly the SPO-2 RWR but just looking on a description of it's capabilities it was meant as a device that would warn pilots about a boogie equipped with radar ranging sights on their tails. During Korean War, communists managed to get their hands on a crashed but still in a good shape Sabre. One of the biggest surprise for them were the sights which were much more advanced compared to what they had during this time. Apart of the sights technology they’ve created a warning system that would alert MiG pilots about their rear hemisphere being beamed by a radar ranging device. MiG-19 entered the service in 1955, about the same time as the first soviet SAM system - S-25. During this time the electronic warfare wasn't the concern as the main AA threads were still flak and low altitude AA systems.

Fact is they wouldn't be able to hit barn when shooting inside of it. The rear gunner seem actually to have a tad better aim. There is a chance that he’ll hit something when overflying the target - which generally is not the smartest thing to do, especially that the pilot should maintain steady flight to give any chances for the AI gunners. Regarding Huey gunners, their accuracy isn't adjustable (unless there is some kind of a mod out there). It's possible to set their reaction to threats and burst length. Aside of that I don't think Huey gunners have much better accuracy - Miniguns split so many bullets that they'll hit something eventually. With M60 their aim is similar to that from Mi-8 and Kord.

I wonder if the flak will be able to work in batteries, utilizing different tactics like barrage or each individual unit will try to shoot targets on its own. A great informational movie that shows some basic flak operations: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FWtQz7qp_v8

No issues whatsoever. Been running on Windows 10 since it's release date. First on an upgraded install and later on a clean one. Actually after the upgrade I've noticed a slight performance boost but a part of it the stability is the same if not better compared to Windows 7 or 8. The only thing that I didn't like is the simplified UI. More "advanced" features are either missing or harder to reach. Another thing is the "apps" mess - just the idea to substitute proper PC applications with the cell phone "apps" is absolutely missed and on top o that systems comes with a lot of this apps bloatware installed by default. One great thing however is the startup time - my Windows 10 PC is up and running already by the time when my Windows 7 laptop thinks if it's already a good time to display widnows logo or give me a more time to make a coffe.

As for the training missions (cold start, taxi and take off) the first three contain their own view setting that overwrite the user one. It's a well known issue in DCS. It's especially a pain when deployed on the MP server for instance. Anyway, Heatblur should remove the "config\view" folder from those missions.

I've probably already mentioned it but IMO it's a lost opportunity that there isn't an F-5/Aggressors campaign bundle. As there are probably many people that have Nevada and FC3, such bundle might convince some undecided to get the F-5. Anyway, not a request, just a suggestion to ED sales department :D

If you don't want to make the IC "unhappy" use the view configuration stored in users folder. You may create it on your own or use this file and modify it according to your needs: https://forums.eagle.ru/showpost.php?p=3062524&postcount=662

The question would be what are the criterias that would allow to quantify "which DCS module has the best flight model". Other than that the discussion will be just purelly subjective, leaning towards what "I like and enjoy to fly" more.

Yes you can. Though landing/starting may be challanging as the runways are from WW2 era.

An update, wasn't expecting that. Great, many thanks! Your compilation is my go-to textures since quite a while. It's just a spot on. The most balanced one, not too washed out and not too colorful. One think that was always bothering me in DCS. Why do the trees have leafs during the winter season. Are there any "no-leafs" mods?

P seems to be the most universal version. Based just on a quick lookup (assume it's not complete/fully correct): - search radar, no lock capability (no SAR missiles). As already mentioned radar has really a limited range and don't expect it to be usefull on low altitudes (brace yourself, bug reports that radar doesn't see a target just in front of the nose are coming :lol: ) - guns: two 23mm NR-23 or two 30mm NR-30 in later upgrade of P. (90 bullets per each?, ~6s of fire ?) - IR missiles, K-13 - generally a copy of Aim-9 Sidewinder with increased amount of exposives. Inner and outer pylons (max 4 missiles) - A-G rocket pods - ORO-57K pods in 4, 8 and 16 variants. Carries the S-5 A-G unguided rocket. Seems that 8 rocket variant of the pod was most poular with MiG-19. Were other also used? Mounted on both inner and outer pylons or only on the inner one? - External drop tanks on outer pylons: 760l (found also information indicating 800l and 1140l drop tanks) - Bombs? From other proposed versions like the PM doesn't have canons and is equipped with K-5M anti bomber missile, which doesn't have any no use in dog-fight. S version is not equipped with the radar (nor IR missiles? - guns only).

I wanted to comment but after reading to the end. Sorry, I'll pass...

+1. I would rep you but I have to "spread some reputation". Whatever it means :D

Great post among a see of posts full of claims. For instance, the RSBN. Yes, the way how the panel works is different and L-39 does a bit better job in this respect. On the other hand the system was implemented long before ED did it in the core. If you focus on the core function of the system - it does it's job. It'll guide the plane on the descend as also landing correctly. Besides, why as a users should we care there is single file in the background? Another point is that the issues steams from how DCS implements the nav aids. They should be a mission editor assets that mission designers could place according to the needs. Anyway, IMO everything depends on the attitude. Using another example, for some the fact that the weapon selector does not switch automatically is a show stopper. For others a discrepancy that should be fixed but barely an inconvenience.

That may indicate an error (syntax?) in the file. Server.lua in SavedGames folder works fine for Ka-50.

Just noticed the same. As far as the aircraft is moving the controls are ok. When stationary the stick starts to shake aswell it's movement gets locked, usually in one quadrant. For example: 1. joystick right -> stick/axis right 2. joystick left -> stick/axis right 3. joystick up -> stick/axis down 4. joystick down - stick/axis down This bug is consistent, happens every time regardless if the plane is started cold, hot or even on the runway. As soon as the plane starts to move everything gets back to normal but when stopped the bug comes back again. I would say it's quite serious. I've spend a lot of time trying to figure out whats wrong and checking if my joystick is not broken until just by accident I've noticed that everything is fine when the plane starts to move.

IMO the chances that this is a hardware issue are close to 0%. Simply, for most of the people it has been working before the update and I guess people didn't massivelly change the hardware at the same time that update to 2.0x came out :) It must be something related to the software - GPU drivers (version), VC++ redistributable, something screwed with the update, etc...

It's not exactly that trainers are a bad thing. After getting the L-39 I've totally changed my mind about them. Some are a great planes but well, if the question is T-2 or A-7 first the answer is quite obvious: A-7 all the way! That's really narrow way of thinking. There are a lot of other people that would love the get MiG-19 or any other "vintage" aircraft. I'm quite sure that anything from list of: MiG-17, MiG-19, MiG-23, Su-17/22, Su-24, Su25, F-4 would trigger a hype train, probably even a bigger one than another early 4'th gen fither (unless it's a MiG-29). I would even say an opposite. After Normandy, DCS should focus on Korea (1-st gen jets) and then Vietnam (2-nd, early 3-rd gen jets) to build a base of assets in consistant way. Focusing on 4'th gen first is like starting to build a house from the roof.

Do you have both 2.0 and 1.5 on both PC's? Both 2.0 are updated to the latest version?

Yes, but as I understood the point was about the content shipped with the module and in case of the warbirds and in terms of the campaigns it is rather slim. The stock campaign is more of an extended, practical tutorial. It's still worth to fly and it is good that it's included but it's far from the level from other campaigns. As for the MP servers, most of them are dogfight servers - which probably steams from the lack of assests from the era. By the way, is the P-51D DLC campaign an interesting one?

Another point that is a good illustration about DCS at the moment. Some time ago I was mostly flying A-10C and wishing for much more aircrafts. Now there are still planes that are an instant buy for me but at the same time I have already so many modules that I could only wish more time to be able to properly learn them in all of the details. This might actually be a challenge for ED in the future - with more modules coming people will shift probably more from getting every module more towards picking a selected aircrafts. I would love to support every developer but I have to admit that probably I'll have to skip a few future modules, including some that are now in development as I already have few planes that are only sitting on display in the hangar. Anyway, going back to the topic A-7 is an instant buy for me :)

C'mon. It's hard not to notice the great progress DCS has made through the years and how much the DCS has grew over that time. Yes, the modules do take more than quite often originally announced but looking on DCS we really are lucky to have a possibility to experience a great sim. This was hard to imagine 5 years ago when the sims were rather perceived as a niche and even foreseen as a dying market. Besides, still more is going to come and that's actually a great thing that the 3'rd party devs got an experience which creates a much bigger momentum and development potential for DCS than it was few years back. DCS has come a long way, from quite a niche and often startup like environment to a leader with solid foundations for the future. We really should appreciate all the hard work ED and 3’rd party devs are doing and ease up a bit on more frequent “I’m a customer I demand approach” especially that it’s not exactly an easy market.

Well, then you don't have much of options in DCS at the moment. Another module from this era will be MiG-19 by RAZBAM. Really, the MiG-21 is great. I think the best single word that was found in this thread describing it is that it feels "alive". Personally I could say that MiG-21 is one of those few modules which causes a smile on my face every time I come back to it after a break. I don't know what are the criteria for judging that but MiG-21 bis is one of planes for which I've got a real manual. Actually in my native langague. It did match quite well with what is implemented in the module. There are a few discripancies but at the same time they are known and confirmed by MM3 as planned to be fixed. What you're waiting for then :doh: It does look great. Even standing still on the ground it looks like going supersonic. Con: MiG-21 was used all arround the word. Plus it's good to have a different look to see if other tehnologies are so good as they are advertised. I can tell you that I can also read Cyrillic, thoug it hasn't been exactly my choise to learn it soo you could imagine that I generally also prefer to see the USSR stuff in my gunsight. But thinking this way lacks perspective. Don't limit yourself. You'll loose oportunity to experience such great modules as MiG-15bis, MiG-21bis, Mi-8 and L-39. Please correct me if I'm wrong - silly but I can't tell from my memory but the module comes with english cockpit. If not for sure there are mods arround. The amount of switches can be intimidating at first but actually the cockpit is outlined in logical way and quite easy to learn. It's as much applicable as F5. The challange is the overall DCS environment and most MP server setup putting MiG-21 side by side with F-15. Being serious, if you look from it's native times: - it's all weather and night flight capable - you'll have a lot of great time and fun learning the navigation in it. It's much more capable in this aspect than F5. - it has a BVR capability as also capability to engage from the front aspect - first eastern 3'rd gen jet. - though it hasn't been designed for this role it has quite good air to ground capabilities. It can be equipped in quite a big variaty of air to ground ordinance - "bis" variant has onboard guns - it has a nuke Shortly, without going into discussion about flight performance etc, just feature and potentiall whise MiG-21 bis beats F-5E heads down. Don't take it as a point of "pride". It just means that in DCS you can get more time doing different things with it. I fully get you as I initially had the same approach. On the other hand it's only a game and those few eastern block modules that we have are among the best! After all, flying a soviet made equipment in a video game doesn't make you a communist :)

Good point. Great to hear that the problem is fixed but does it mean we're going to get it in the next update or is there any temporary workaround that everyone could do on it's own.