Dehuman

It's ED dragging the chain on that one

Nice video. I can't land the MiG like that though. Mine are always closer to a three point landing.

You can't use IFF in fixed beam or after lock, as in the example I gave. Unless you'd scanned the target earlier, you've got to put you trust in AWACS.

Not entirely. In a head on engagement, using fixed beam on the radar you can quickly start emitting, lock, and fire on an F-5 with little warning. This puts them on the defensive and gives you the chance to seal the deal with a couple of R-60's

Are start up, operation, and weapons employment procedures detailed and accurate? Start up can take up to 8 minutes for a full INS alignment or be very quick in an intercept/scramble configuration. I would say yes detailed and accurate but not complicated when compared to older aircraft and helos. Specifically: Systems, avionics, and engine management. Weapons employment , effectiveness, and envelopes. Here I think the Mirage really shines. You really get to feel the limits of a pulse doppler radar. There are some limits imposed upon the module in this regard by DCS itself (ground mapping etc) but these will be overcome in time. Realistic stress limits on landing and TO. Burst tires and broken landing gear? Yes this happens, took me a little while to get the flare just right for a delta wing. Load carried has a noticeable effect on its TO and landing. Flight departure proneness, and departure/spin recovery. The FBW system for the most part looks after itself here, thing the pilot has to watch is the energy state. Getting into flat spins is nonetheless possible as is recovering. Communication systems. AM/FM VHF/UHF, ILS, TACAN/GPS tactical navigation. All of those except GPS,but the INS makes up for it. The ILS is excellent best currently in DCS.

I figured out what the problem is. The 64bit .dll for freetrack. Don't know of a fix though. HeadTracker.zip

Get the M-2000C. It has a good radar and HUD which will see other aircraft for you. It will also have no problem making full use of your hardware.

http://lmgtfy.com/?q=leatherneck+simulations+magnitude+3

RWR was in the "night" position

Great job! :D I can confirm it's working on the DCS side of things for me (1.5.6 release) However seem to be having some compatability issues with VAICOM -> I can only talk to Sochi. Plenty of parking, two long runways, could be worse ;)

Sort of. The idea of fighter "generations" gets murky here. These were retrospectively applied to older aircraft whilst later generations were developed. Depending how you look at it the MiG-19 is either a late first gen (Gen 1+ if you will) as it is in essence a really souped up MiG-15. The version we're getting does have more of the features typically given to second generation fighters e.g. radar + missiles but these are add-ons just like reduced RCS, AESA and TVC are the add-ons of current Gen 4+ fighters. (The more tricky acronyms the better probably) Similarly I consider the MiG-21bis and F-5E3 to be Gen 2 with Gen 3 kind of being the "Orphan Generation" with the oddball planes like the MiG-23 and Mirage F-1, sort of a stop-gap response to Vietnam and the Arab-Israeli wars showing that dogfighting was still in fashion. TLDR; Don't put too much stock into the "generations" they're mostly subjective.

.

Basically it's going to be deadly when paired up with a MiG-21. The 21 takes care of the need for Mach 2 and all aspect missile armament, 19 will turn on a dime and has guns with a 1-second burst mass of ~ 18kg, also has a bubble canopy. I think the Tigers and Viggens are in for a hard time.

I'm not saying these are bad aircraft, my point was to debunk the idea that Lockheed would face serious consequences if their aircraft had problems whilst for some reason Soviet aircraft designers enjoyed some sort of immunity if they screwed up.

:lol: F-22 Hypoxia debacle, F-35. -Lockheed are laughing all the way to the bank. I think in 1950's USSR aircraft performance was very much the designers problem, lest they get taken out back and shot. Heck Sukhoi went back to the drawing board when it was discovered that the Su-27 wouldn't perform as promised, this despite series production already being underway.

If the Eclair is equipped by the mission editor, and I re-arm on the airfield and have the ground crew remove the Eclair I still have the additional chaff & flares as well as a functioning parachute.

With the hints of a greater story it sounds like a great premise for a campaign!

This, https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=129341 I don't know how I used to live without it.

Went out for a bit, came home, did more testing. Now it's working fine. Tried every different load out combination I could think of and all works as intended. :dontgetit: All I can think of is in that time I've closed and re-started DCS

There is an app for android that exports the TEWS, I've not gotten around to setting it up yet, but the reviews on the google play seem to indicate it works.

The twin missile pylons work fine. But carrying the single R-60M pylons = no tone. edit: this is in 1.5.6 "stable"

VEAO are an exception because by the time they've released it it'll be obsolete and declassified :lol:

danger zone!

Have you tried having the SAM active and on red alarm state but with ROE set to "Weapon Hold" and use the F10 command to change the ROE to "Weapon Free" ?

Yes but the Su-25T was used in Chechenya so it's quite at home busting tanks on that small corner of the map.