Jonne

It does not include the specific year the model in DCS was modelled after though. For the MiG-21bis, I can tell you, that due to a minor modification to the IFF present in the DCS version, it must be from the mid 80s. Oh and you will not get happy using Wikipedia data for this, as it is way to unprecise for what I understand you are trying to gather.

Aircraft work exactly that way. Even on a jet engine a generator will not spin by magic, so it will have an effect on power output and it will load even a jet engine. The mechnical load on the engine is directly dependent on the electrical load of the generator and thus directly dependent on what is switched on in the aircraft. For AC, there is not even a battery in the line, for DC, the system is very like in a car. Will you notice this effect? In a jet, most of the time not, however this gets relevant if you draw really large amounts of power, like for example an AWACS does. My guess is, it is not modelled in the aircraft we have in DCS. If I think about it, even on the Yak-52, the mechanical load of the generator should not greatly exceed 6kW as a maximum and thus be less than 2% of TOP, not that I can think of any way of actually drawing 100A with the eletrical equiptment of that aircraft.

According to the schematics, the afterburner should only be disabled when the SPS is active, which it will not be when the power lever is set to afterburner. Seems like this is only a protection should the afterburner be on despite the power lever position commanding it not to be. Probably a protection should the power lever be missaligned. As on take off you are supposed to use the afterburner and have the flaps extended to 30°, it would not make any sense to disable the afterburner purely regarding to flaps position.

Have you tried using the NTTR frequency list for the other maps? I am rather certain that there was an easy way of finding the right frequency on maps apart from Caucasus, I just can't really recall and did not have a chance to check yet. Of course ultimately the frequency settings are part of the mission design, but the standard settings should be easy to figure out and should apply to nearly all missions out there.

Doesn't the kneeboard page also include columns for other maps on the radio page?

I am very sorry, but the article and your post are based on the wrong assumption, that the force during the expansion cycle changes direction when it actually does not. Even with a windmilling piston engine, during that cycle the pressure in the cylinder is still higher than in the crankcase and thus the force is still pointing from the piston towards the crankshaft. Secondly the oil supply holes on a radial crankshaft are where they typically are for a piston engine, which is where the stress is the least and not where it is the biggest like you and the unnamed author of the article describe it. Also holes for oil supply are not a special radial trick, but a standard feature of a crankshaft, or a plain fluid bearing in general. Those bearings tend to work best at speed and low force, which is exactly the situation you have with a windmilling engine.

Does VAICOM change the preset or the frequency of that preset? I would guess it is the latter and thus the UFCP would remain unchanged.

If the developers have deemed rockets on the inner pods unrealistic, than I am very happy they have made the decision not to add them. Thank you Deka! This is not about balance, but realism.

Those NATO bases you have depicted are only the USAF ones. Luftwaffe, RAF and others were all over Western Germany.

There were a couple of NATO aircraft downed after intruding East German airspace. Apart from that nothing, but it would give a huge potential for cold war gone hot scenarios, as this would have been a place were it had gone hot first.

Das hat wenig mit alt und neu zu tun. Die ShP Variante ist nur ein Zusatz zur normalen BetAB, ähnlich der ganzen lustigen Sachen, die man an die amerikanischen Bomben schrauben kann. Eine Variante ohne Fallschirm und mit Rakete gibt es meines Wissens nach aber nicht, würde auch keinen Sinn ergeben, da die Bombe viel Wirkungsvoller gegen Bunker ist, wenn sie senkrecht in den Boden fliegt. Die normale BetAB, also ohne Aufsatz, hat auch keine sonderlich beeindruckenden Durchschlagsleistungen. Hier ein Video einer BetAB-500ShP: Die von Isegrim beschriebene Übungsbombe klingt recht plausibel. Das Feuer wirkt auf dem Video auch recht hell, wobei das täuschen kann.

Ganz klar keine BetAB, die wird erst per Schirm gebremst und dann per Raketenmotor senkrecht nach unten beschleunigt. Würde auch auf Kh-23 oder Kh-25 tippen, da das die beiden einzigen gelenkten Raketen sind, die die MiG-23BN feuern kann. Unterschied zwischen MiG-23BN und MiG-27 ist nicht so einfach zu erkennen, allerdings ist die MiG-27 kaum exportiert worden, von daher muss es bei der NVA eine MiG-23BN sein.

That is wrong. The majority of the surface you see from the front aspect is composite on the MiG-21.

Would not be surprised if at least older fighters were able to do that. SAMs, like the S-75 were definetely able to do that and did employ those tactics. In a modern environment this is rather not effictive though.

It is indeed quite comfortable. One trap is the dual R60 racks though, as you need to manually switch between them, to not end up with a too asymetric loadout.

This should probably go into an FAQ, as it is asked and misunderstood so often: The IR/SARH switch and weapon selector are priority selectors only, with the IR/SARH switch having a higher priority than the weapon selector, so the behavior as observed is correct. There is a master arm equivalent on the MiG-21 for all pylons, which is the top row 2nd switch from the left on the weapon systems panel on the right wall. Than there is another one for the gun.

Thank you for proving my point.

That is not what they said. They had remarks regarding situational awarness and cockpit ergonomics, but never did they say they would get absolutely destroyed in bvr.

So you have bought a 2080 and a Reverb, but dont want to pay a module at full price?

Just that this is exactly what they have been doing... http://leatherneck-sim.com/2020/05/20/crouching-update/

Habe den Fehler mal dick markiert. Weapon release ist der richtige Knopf.

Unfortuantely I have to withdraw my sign up due to conflicting dates.

I would guess that the MiG-21 AB IR value is actually just a placeholder and unused, as the whole afterburner was modelled as a separate engine, which itself had created various problems in the past including the IR signature reducing with AB engaged, which had been fixed since then.

JG-1_Jonne MiG-21

Maybe its just that the visor now works in VR? Have not been able to try yet.