Vatikus

I fully understand that radar should not be all seeing eye, etc. Thing is, in dcs m2k lock drops as well in high aspect angle with plenty of closure.

Since there are dozens of bugs regarding radar display, we cannot be sure if these are isolated only to the display representation.

I know Cmptohocah, as I said "if they knew they had missile incoming"... There were pilots who did evasion maneuvers and evaded 120 and 7. There was zero use of chaff as 29A does not have it. p.s. Since you are from Serbia, you can read yourself L-18 manuals. Well worth it. Cheers from Slovenia :)

The rotary switch has multiple actions. It also controls the Dmax launch zone, ie. besides the fuze setting on R27. Regarding the settings... small is for drones and missiles, medium is for fighter size f15/16, large is for bomber size b1/f111/b52 However to expand the topic regarding chaff... I find it quite interesting that mig29A did not use chaff catriges at all. The manual speaks only about flares. This explains also why Serbian pilots only used (if they knew they had missile incoming) maneuvering for defeating aim120 and aim7. Using doppler radar pretty much lowers usage of chaff.

GGTharos, fuze setting is from manual.. it says, if target is using chaff, set it to medium to avoid triggering off the chaff cloud. It's not something I made up.

in mig29 manual it says that chaff can drop lock in look down from rear hemisphere... rest should not be a problem. And the R27R1 only needs to have proximity fuze settings on medium size target, to lessen chance of fuzing on chaff cloud. So if you have lock, there is no way R27 should go for anything else but locked target.

Well said sedenion. If I look from my own experience, it took me a lot of time to dig out "RTFM" from various sources to be able to use M2K and of course, in the end to find out that I am hitting a wall of bugs which due to no proper manual are hard to notice as you do not have anything solid to compare to. This is false. ED's store does not list M2K as an early access, nor is STEAM. By this, I, as a customer, am taking ED's stance over fanboi apologism.

Or simply numbers ... i.e. during '99 Kosovo air campaign , there was a shortage of aim120, so there were mixed formations of f15c with aim7.

i'll just leave this here ...

Look, I never wrote that M2K is abandoned and that it will stay in the current state forever... I understand just fine what was the RB statement. Fact is, there is/will be no progress available for M2K for unknown time table. This is what is making users uneasy and they have all right to be, as you have yours to be ok with the current state. Again, as I said it before, I see the culprit of the problem in ED not RB as they are the one who allow this type of work -> not enough manpower to work on multiple projects at the same time, resulting in hurting the development of the released module.

This. It is that simple. Some of us like early access. I think the frustration is more in the line that there is no final product YET as developer switches to a new project. I see this more as ED's fault than 3rd party developers, as ED should had better QA policy for the modules. As of now, we have bunch of half made products with no guarantee that they ever will be finished. It's a mess which only ED can fix.

I was flying a MP with F5... and was in fight vs. AI enemy F5. What happened was that as I have seen AI infront of me being hit by a missile which was shot from the ground and at the same time my plane exploded... After checking the tacview file (screenshots attached), it showed that Stinger which hit AI gave all damage to me.

Since there is already texturing in progress, I would like to, again, ask to make sure that pilot-plane is in proper scale ... the way it is now, it looks like default DCS pilot/ejection seat which is completely out of porpotions with regards to av8... this in the end also reflects to the canopy bar where modeller tried to match pilot head with it and thus creating totally wrong shape of it...

PAK-FA software testing...

No, both switches act the same

The ball moves, so it is present. Problem is that there is no effect by abusing sideslip (ie: w/ fast roll), except blackout :noexpression:

Golo, what manual says is that autorotation starts if there is sideslip or/and near 0G coupled with high roll rate. This does not mean that what we have now is super correct, but what we had was even worse.

Real mig21 has roll stabilisation up to 70deg. I have tried it and I can keep past 45deg ok... The problem I see is that if I roll inverted there is no more clutter as it was before... also clouds do not effect it anymore :/

Not really... nothing what the guy said was not known before... if one looks at the flight manual, one will understand when this inertia rotation could happen. It is not a normal roll at all...

Thx Azrayen

If it is, it is not working ... you can see on the picture I had attached: same contact, just one shows PID other PIC mode.

What is the function of this chevron? (chk pic)

13.VLS Vati mig21 I have experience as a GCI

Thx Ironhand for giving the link... I got it elsewhere, but it's the same, yes.

If someone is interested how real life R-27R1 works, there is a great reading material explaining exact guidance, etc. in the following book: