IvanK

Be nice if you could load the presets via the DTC. You can access and edit the DCS before start. Best solution would be to have the current option with presets in the ME and via DTC. Before start you would bring up the DTC check the presets if not as desired then change right there.

Delta H is in metres hardwired as far as I am aware. In my notes I have converted to feet for the calcs. also another calc if down in the weeds and want the bottom of the beam on the horizon (i.e. at ground level) you need 5 deg ant elev you can get that 5 deg by: TDC 24nm Delta H +4 TDC 37nm Delta H +6

I have done it on the Germany map as well. Its weird as there is nothing definite as far as I can make out that causes or stops it happening.

Here is a TRK. Startup Syria. I change the AD/WYPT switch to WYPT, I change the the Navigation and Landing channels. Start up and taxi ... no stutter and no changes on the NAV panel. Then TO still no changes. So to me its a random event or caused by something we don't know. Mig29start3.zip

Safety wired the wrong way.

I have heard of the term rivet counter before , this is a new variant.... but I admit IRL I have done exactly this

Here is my take on making Antenna elevation control in the MIG29 in a Free search (no GCI) environment manageable. I fly in Imperial so I have used nm and feet for the discussion. The Target Manual range throttle wheel was not operational in this version of the MIG29 Situation: TDC position in range coupled with Delta H selection controls Antenna elevation and therefore the altitude coverage. With a Fixed Delta H changing the TDC position in range causes the Antenna elevation to change. So as you move the TDC over the target Antenna elevation will change, at close ranges this antenna elevation can be large. Radar Information In search the 4 Bar scan covers on average 10 degrees. The coverage does in fact vary depending on function and TDC range position but 10 degrees is a good calculation compromise. Each click of Delta H varies the beam centre Altitude coverage by 1000m or 3280' for the +- 1 Delta H click. For the remainder Delta H clicks 2, 4, 6, 8 each click raises the antenna 2 degrees or 2000m or 6400’. Proposed solution: To minimise pilot workload and keep elevation control workable I suggest placing the TDC at 30nm range. This is a typical contact range in the Mig29. It also means that small TDC changes in TDC range to place it over the target will not result in large changes in Antenna elevation. As can be seen in the diagram below 10 degrees covers a fair bit of sky 32,000' at 30nm and 64,000' at 60nm. With the TDC at 30nm the AH value effectively equates to antenna elevation in degrees. (The old Elevation formula: Ant Elev = Alt Diff in 100s ft/Range in nm might be handy) If running at sea level then to get the bottom of the beam close to parallel to the ground then set TDC at 30nm and delta H at +4. (2 clicks of Delta H = 4degrees in elevation). Which means at 30nm you are covering Ground level to 29,000’ and at 60nm ground level to 58,000’. Once you have the search process done then consider going into TWS as Antenna elevation will be controlled by the FCS. With Good GCI then the TDC can be placed at the called target range and Delta H value.

I have tried it for myself Real world in another platform ... Basic Range and Endurance control theory. Altitude is included on the Chart A4-2

Lufwaffe Manual GAF T.O. 1F-MIG29-1 Figure A4-2 specifically states 4.5deg AOA for range and 6 deg AOA for Endurance. On a side note FA18 figures are 4.2 Alpha for Range and 5.6 alpha for Endurance

Here is my take on making Antenna elevation control in the MIG29 in a Free search (no GCI) situation manageable. I fly in Imperial so I have used nm and feet for the discussion. Situation: TDC position in range coupled with Delta H selection controls Antenna elevation and therefore the altitude coverage. With a Fixed Delta H changing the TDC position in range causes the Antenna elevation to change. So as you move the TDC over the target Antenna elevation will change, at close ranges this antenna elevation can be large. Radar Specs In search the 4 Bar scan covers on average 10 degrees. The coverage does in fact vary depending on function and TDC range position but 10 degrees is a good calculation compromise. Each click of Delta H varies the beam centre Altitude coverage by 1000m or 3280' Proposed solution: To minimize pilot workload and keep elevation control workable I suggest placing the TDC at 30nm range. This is a typical contact range in the Mig29. It also means that small TDC changes in TDC range to place it over the target will not result in large changes in Antenna elevation. As can be seen in the diagram below the 10 degrees covers a fair bit of sky 32,000' at 30nm and 64,000' at 60nm. In addition its worth pointing out with the TDC at 30nm each click of Delta AH means a 1 degree change in Antenna elevation. If running at sea level then to get the bottom of the beam at and parallel to the ground then set TDC at 30nm and delta H at +5. (5 clicks of Delta H = 5degrees in elevation) Once you have the search process done then consider going into TWS as Antenna elevation will be controlled by the FCS.

Rule of thumb when hurting on gas and trying to get home: Max range at any Altitude set 4 deg Alpha power as required to maintain level flight (nil wind) Max endurance at any Altitude set 5-6 deg Alpha power as required to maintain level flight. For Max performance in both be at Optimum altitude/ Which will vary as a function of Drag Index and weight but be in the 30,000's roughly.

So if it wasn't fitted to "this version" then at what range is the delta H value referenced to ? is as has been suggested (and in game evidence supports this) it is referenced to the Acquisition cursor range ? Is this a yet to be implemented feature ? or what we are stuck with ? The "correct as is" label and the quote above from Matt in the post above to this thread implies its not going to be incorporated. .... a definitive statement here would help. Elevation changing as you try to position the acquisition cursor over the target makes it almost unmanageable in free search type operation. Probably OK in the guidance mode with DL doing the work for you. I guess TWS is the go as then I presume elevation will be controlled by the TWS mode itself ?

I have done some cold spawns on Caucus and Syria. With Switch in WYPT (I align on Ramp coordinates in WYPT 1) and Nav/RSBN channel preset to a specific freq. Cold start and I taxy no stutter and both AD/WYPT switch remains in WYPT and manual Nav/RSBN channel remains as preselected.

Interesting this does not always happen. I have seen it a number of times but its random imo.

Not sure I think the Switch is purely mechanical. Just allows you to force selection which would be needed if returning to am unplanned airfield.

If the ADF's are correctly set in ME as Outer and Inner and the Airport data for the RSBN and PRMGs are coded via the DTC then in AUTO in landing mode as you pass over the Outer ADF the system will sequence automatically to the Inner ADF.

Divert fields ? No not really they are just airfields you can use. There is nothing specifically that says they are divert fields. There is nothing in the input routine that defines them as a "Divert" field. To the NAV system an airfield is an airfield. Return simply uses the data stored for the selected airfield to compute the return routine. Edit: Though the RU version of the DCS manual contains a lot more info on the RETURN mode than the EN version. In the RU version it says exactly what you are seeing will happen that is if say Afld 2 is showing as soon as you press REURN then Airfield 1 is selected .... not sure on the logic though.

If you are using Baro alt for your refrence.

I believe it should remain on the airfield selected. The Return flight path routine is a return to the selected airfield not the airfield of departure. Thats assuming you have coded airfield 3 by way of the DTC. So if it is changing then thats a bug to me.

Found this in the Alan R. Wise version of the manual Page 131: "The input of ballistic data for the aerial bombs is carried out before flight from the monitor centre by the ground crew setting the wafer switches (coded input) to positions corresponding to the code of aerial bombs used. Depending on the conditions of combat use and the bombing mode, additional information about the target vertical separation relative to the departure airfield and the selected drop angle of aerial bombs in toss bombing is entered from the input monitor panel" So my take on that is that certainly for toss bombing on a pre planned target the system knows the difference in height between the departure airfield and the pre planned target... a +- DeltaH. Now whether that has any input in the other bombing modes in OPT who knows. More info required as to exactly how this works.

Found this in the Alan R. Wise version of the manual Page 131: "The input of ballistic data for the aerial bombs is carried out before flight from the monitor centre by the ground crew setting the wafer switches (coded input) to positions corresponding to the code of aerial bombs used. Depending on the conditions of combat use and the bombing mode, additional information about the target vertical separation relative to the departure airfield and the selected drop angle of aerial bombs in toss bombing is entered from the input monitor panel" So my take on that is that certainly for Toss bombing on a pre planned target the system knows the difference in height a +- DeltaH between the departure airfield and the pre planned target. Now whether that has any input in the other bombing modes in OPT who knows. more info required.

But ....based on the limited documentation out there I believe IRL you cannot actually set a target elevation preflight into the INS/WCS. Though the DTC allows it and the DTC capability is being used to neatly simulate data entry by the ground crew on the ground , IRL there just isn't provision for any altitude entry into the system. Happy to be corrected here. I guess if there is documentation that shows that Baro ranging can be used (and the methodogy) then that would settle the issue ... just haven't seen that in the Docs I can source. So to me the only ranging options are Laser or Radalt. Though I guess changing the QNH to a dodgy value (aka target area QFE) might work ?? assuming baro ranging is even used

It is my belief that there is no Baro ranging in the Mig29A. All you have is laser and radalt. Going through the available ( limited) documentation IRL there is no way to input target elevation ( preflight) into the INS/WCS so the system has no knowledge of target altitude. (Happy to be corrected here). The displayed solution is first bomb of the stick not the centre. So to centre the stick you need to pickle short... easy in CCIP ... dont know how you would achieve that in a CCRP release.

As far as I can make out whether its wind or target motion is irrelevant. You the pilot just need to do your pilot stuff to track the target so that will take in to account both wind and target motion ... the result is then applied as a simple total vector correction to the nil wing/tgt motion CCIP.

The process of tracking the target with the Lock on depressed with the sighting reticle on the target is to "build" the target motion/wind speed info/correction. (its kind of like the process with an LCOSS gunsight ... tracking time is required to build the solution/correction). When you release the lock on button the correction determined by the tracking process is then applied to the CCIP pipper .. thats why you see it move slightly. You then move the now wind/motion corrected CCIP to the target and pickle. the Russian manual states that you have 10 seconds from lock on release to pickle. After 10 seconds the wind/motion correction is removed and the solution is then back to being a nil wind/motion CCIP. The Russian manual also states that best accuracy is shown at 4 seconds after lock on release. To me that implies that the correction is actually washed out to zero at the 10 second point. Exactly the same thing happens with the CCRP/delayed CCIP solution its just the correction is applied to the steering circle and release point. In all cases in any bombing method on any platform smooth methodical flying is required to achieve the best results. Rough rushed handling just doesn't give the WCS a chance to do its thing properly.