asla36

Yup, that's neat!

Awesome! You guys bring such great aircraft to life in DCS, thank you so much for all your hard work! Gonna have a lot of fun learning this, and the summer break (Q3) is the perfect time to release a module!

As far as I know it should be able to out-turn the F-15s and A-10s. It has lower wing loading than both [MiG-19p aprox 330 kg/m2, F-15c 358 kg/m², and the A-10A 482 kg/m² (note that these values are at loaded weight)], but it will indeed be lacking in the P/W ratio (0.85) compared to the F-15s one (1.07), and it's top speed should also be lower (the F-15 being 1 213 km/h faster, that's nearly the max speed of the MiG-19p). But if the F-15 does go full "Oh, shiny screens!", you should be able to shoot them down. That is if they are not also going full "Oh, shiny burners!". But if the Eagle is competent, it's going to be a real challenge. But I like challenges, and I am certainly going to like the MiG-19p! This bird is going to be awesome in the 3rd gen arena that we are getting [MiG-21bis (MiG-19p, I know it's 2.Gen but it's gonna be included) vs F-5E (Mirage III)]! But all that hype-think makes it harder to wait... Good thing we have an awesome array of modules coming out to keep us busy! And feel free to take as long as you want to, because the end result is getting better and better with every passing day! *Side-note:* Feel free to correct me if I got something wrong, in the end it will result in us all becoming smarter!

Me likey my hipey! But you can't deny, we have a lot to be hyped about! We've got an awesome module being developed, and by such a good developer! :3 So get onboard, the hype train is leaving for Siberia! It'll be back in June (plez make another one of these, they're awesome!), so better not miss it!

That would be nice as well! But we are newer going to get one, even if someone wanted to make one. The Russian secrecy is really not good for us simmers... Maybe have the MiG-27, or Su-24/25? They would be way more likely to make their way into DCS due to being old, and containing relatively little advanced tech. Still not going to ever happen, no matter how much we want it. Of course I would gladly be proven wrong, very gladly.

This is awesome! Will be a nice Товариш to have in the DCS "Товариш" club. I can feel the sneak... It's everywhere! Will be an awesome turn-fighter to add to our collection, and a lot of fun to fly! Surely a Day-1 buy! Thank you for bringing such an amazing aircraft to life in DCS! Do you guys have any other Russian aircraft planned at the moment [su-15/22/24 MiG-25/29 (very early model)?], or some other awesome birds like the F-4 or F-111? If we get the F-105, that would be awesome too! But, I know. It's too early to ask, and right now we have some awesome birds coming from you guys. THANK YOU SO MUCH!!!

The warning lights are easier to track, but require experience to know just when you are riding the red line. I prefer a quick check of the dedicated gauge, if in a sustained turn. But the most important thing to keep your eyes on, is the enemy. Yup the AI damage model is indeed broken. An AI M-2000c can regularly survive an R-60M hit and fight on, but it's good for practice. Since you have to be prepared for scenarios where that happens in MP.

Yup, they are indeed good for forcing the bandit to evade. Newer opponents tend to over-estimate it's capabilities. While in reality it can be defeated without any maneuvers, just dump a lot of chaff and it will loose lock. I don't fire them in pairs though, I fire one and then the other with about a 4-second interval. It means that they are already at a lower energy state when the second missile is fired and PK is even higher. An extra effect is is increases the time the enemy will spend evading (if they spot the second launch). More often than not though I find myself in a close enough place to fire the R-60M from frontal aspect. In my opinion they are just easier and quicker to use at that kind of range, with a higher PK for bonus points. Since you don't have to fiddle with the radar or be super accurate with the beam-mode lock. An added bonus is that you can evade all you like after firing an R-60M, but with the R-3R you have to keep lock (the MiG-21bis has a relatively narrow cone of radar detection/lock).

The dual missile rails do indeed increase drag. I found out with my testing that as soon as I opted for only 4 (instead of 6) missiles with all pylons being used, I was able to beat M-2000c's in a sustained turn. So yes, they do have an effect on drag. But for AI big-bird hunting, the extra missiles are quite useful! I would suggest you set up a training mission against a fighter as well. Practice masking, notching, and BFM against first older and then newer threats. That should prepare you quite well for the multiplayer arena. But there is only one way of practicing true multiplayer, multiplayer (preferably a server with AWACS/GCI players). So practice, and feel free to experiment. The little Soviet Rocket can do some amazing things once you learn it through and through! Glad to have helped, and have an awesome time learning this magnificent bird!

Sorry for posting again so fast, but my current strategy for areal combat against modern thingies is to evade the missiles and beat them in a turning contest. For long range evasion I like to mask, or if cover is insufficient notch at max AoA with a sharp turn-in. A suggestion would be to look at the compass during the notch, paying attention to the starting heading (preferably starting your notch heading straight for the enemy) and reversing the turn when it reaches your 9/3 line. Engage AB, since you need to keep all the speed you have for later! Now depending on the range you either: 1) prepare for the next notch (farther out), 2) reduce throttle to idle and go in for an R-60M shot (closer in, 2-3km). scenarios: 1) You repeat the notching procedure (if shot upon) and merge/find yourself in scenario 2. 2) You shoot your R-60M(s) and beam the enemy, pumping out chaff/flares while keeping the throttle low for an expected IR launch. This will auto-evade any IR missiles from that kind of range if done correctly. Now if your missile(s) miss(es) then you are in a dogfight, making the playing field equal. Remember, the MiG-21bis CAN BEAT THE MIRAGE IN A SUSTAINED TURNING CONTEST! But you HAVE TO RIDE THE RED LINE! keep a close eye on your AoA indicator, but don't forget to look at your enemy. It is all too easy to lose him/her in the MiG's cockpit. Beware of the M-2000c's amazing instant turn however, keep an eye out for launches or them pulling lead! They will be able to do that, but it will scrub all their speed. And remember, the best way to play is to never get seen in the first place. Mask, hide, and use AWACS/GCI to guide you in with your radar turned to standby (just like the Vietnamese did in real life). Then fire heaters AT VERY CLOSE RANGE and engage in a dogfight if need be, once their dead... RUN! This sneaking tactic was used by the Vietnamese MiG-21's against F-4's, so it has it's roots in practicality. I actually have better results in A-A with the MiG-21bis than the M-2000c... But I'm no real pilot, just a newbie with a tactic that seems to be working. So feel free to correct any bad moves in it, after all the end result is us getting better! URAAAAA, for glorious team RED and our completely not outdated tech! URAAAAA!

For a general purpose load out I like having 2 R-3R's and 2 R-60M's. And for dogfight scenarios I take 4 R-60M's with all pylons being used. Also the weapon panel is behind the control stick, that should help with keeping track of what you have fired. The radar-guided missiles (R-3R's) are only really good against strikers, since they get defeated super easily. I have found that the R-3R's work well for Su-25's (since the heat-jammer auto-defeats R-60M's) and R-60M's work for A-10's (if you get them by surprise and they don't spam their flares). Though if the striker doesn't know you're there guns are the best solution. Against fighters the R-3R's are almost completely useless, their only good for scaring enemy fighters that are not aware of how bad they are. Because fighters don't have IR-jammers or that much CM to spam the R-60M's tend to work quite well. They even have some limited all-aspect capability, though that can only be used if the enemy is in AB (and if AB is deactivated early enough can be avoided that way). Though you should beware of the R-60M's 3 major shortcomings: 1) range, 2) bore-sight size, 3) and the amount of time you have to hold down the trigger for launch (2 seconds). 1) The R-60 has to be fired at extreme close distances or frontal aspect to expect a hit, the aircraft's flight computer lies to you when it clears for a hit at rear aspect. (when using radar ranging) 2) The bore-sight angle of the R-60M is extremely small, you really need to be precise to continuously keep the target in there for 2 seconds. 3) In a surprise situation the enemy is going to get the first shot off because of your enormous time to hold the trigger down until release. But practice makes perfect. And if you practice enough, you'l be shooting down M-2000c's in no time!

The MiG-25 would be great, but I would prefer the MiG-23 since it is a better fighter (the MiG-25 is a pure interceptor) and manually changing wing-sweep in a dogfight would be very interesting indeed. The truth is, we're never going to get neither. The MiG-25 would have a BVR only play stile, since it can't do BFM. But the MiG-23 would offer a little worse BVR capability compensated for in BFM situations. In my opinion it's just a more flexible design. In my opinion the MiG-23 would have a far greater chance of taking on the all-mighty Turkey, because it still has a chance if the missiles fail. So in my opinion the MiG-25 would be nice, but the MiG-23 nicer! And lets not forget about the F-4E also being very nice! And if we were talking about pure dreams with no chance of ever happening. Full fidelity modules of early F-15s and MiG-29s, with AH-64 and Panavia Tornado/F-111 for the attack role would complete the Iraq scenario. But again those are dreams we are never going to see come true...

If it were a full on SAM module then yes, but just adding long range SAM sites will be a boring solution. A module would be far more interesting, and I think the player base would prefer getting a full on module. Not some boring AI unit that you can't even control in most MP servers. So AI units are great, but they can't beat a real full-fidelity module. So my most wanted modules to have developed would be... 1) MiG-23 2) F-4 3) AH-1 (would remove from list if I was certain that it is being developed)/64

I would indeed want all of these variants, but they are never going to be made. I just think that there would be a far greater chance of getting a Vietnam map than the correct variants. :( The sad fact is that we rarely get more than 1 variant in DCS. They don't take that much resources to make, but you can't really ask money for them either. They are, in the few cases we have, included in the original purchases. So I would like to hope that in the future we will have all the correct variants, but currently we have to make due with wrong variants. At least we have the aircraft. So I think we have a higher chance of getting an F-4 than a MiG-21PFM. Of course having all the correct variants would be awesome, it is sadly never going to happen. And people will prefer new aircraft anyways (in a 2 choice situation), at least I would rather have an entirely new bird to fly than a variation of something I already know. Ok, now time to end my little stupid ramble and get back on the F-105 track. How was the radar? Was it something comparable to the Viggen or a different story? And how was the SEAD targeting done?

No, that would be taking off! :D

Honestly I don't care if it's the wrong variant, if it still is the same aircraft. We are never going to get all the correct variants for aircraft for all of the scenarios we want. So better to make due with the Bf-109K vs Spitfire MkIX battle of Britain scenario, because we are never going to get a more accurate one. Same with the Vietnam war stuff, we are never going to see a correct version of the MiG-21, Huey, and so on. But at least we have the aircraft, so lets just accept an inaccuracy in the variants and enjoy the awesome modules.

Ok, thx! Didn't see it and got a little bit too exited... :( Will fix my post!

Thanks, will correct my post!

It's a nice thing for beginners. But sadly lacking in the clickable cockpit awesomeness that other modules provide. So full modules of the Flanker, Fulcrum, Frogfoot, and Eagle would make me very happy indeed. Though I think aircraft like the MiG-23 or F-4 would be easier to get info on. And I would prefer those as modules too, because I really like retro tech.

Oh, they sure know how to. The have the perfect timing and content, release a new one just when you are starting to lose hope. And oh does it get you hyped! It also (at least for me) has a positive effect on motivation. For example when the AJS-37 was releasing I got happy times waking up on Mondays! Knowing we were 1 week closer to getting the Viggen. It almost feels like they have a special hype engineer on their team! And when it does release we get a truly groundbreaking and awesome new toy to play with! You guys are so great at doing what you do! :D

MiG-21bis check (wrong variant), MiG-19p check (being developed, wrong variant), F-4 missing, F-105 check (potential future project for RAZBAM), Huey check (wrong variant), AH-1 (being developed hopefully, but correct me if I'm wrong), map not being developed... And as far as I know, no A-1 being developed. So with the massive exception of the F-4, A-1, and a Vietnam map. We should be good to go in about 1-2 years. Of course that's enough time for someone to start developing an F-4, Skyraider or the map. As for my own wishlist: (not including currently developed/planned aircraft that I know of, aka F/A-18, F-14, MiG-19p, Mil-24, AH-1, AV-8 N/A, Panavia Tornado, and so on) 1) MiG-23 (A-A variant) 2) F-111/Su-24 3) AH-64 4) F-4 5) WW2 Russian or Japanese bird: A6M2, Ki-61, Yak-1/3, La-5 So luckily most of what I want is already here or coming. :D

They have? Didn't even realize it, sorry. For the strike role yes, I think that the F-111 or Su-24 would be better modules. Or at least more marketable. But if we would get a Tornado i think I would prefer and A-G variant. I think it would also be interesting if we got an A-A variant. It would be something like a MiG-25/31 or Su-15 for the Russians. You can't do BFM so it's a purely BVR platform. But sadly unlike these the Tornado can't out-speed it's enemies (at the time) to keep distance. So for A-A against the MiG-23 you would have to kill it quickly in BVR. Because you couldn't fight it in BVR without luck (like the MiG-23 pilot not spotting you, due to the bad visibility of Russian cockpits at the time) helping you out. Running would also be a problem, because eventually it would catch you. I just picked the 2 for comparison because they look remarkably alike and as far as I know have similar tactics for both strike/intercept variants.

The more we know, the better! That got me thinking, this bird has better visibility than the Ka-50! Why do the Russians have to build everything like Stronk Stalinium Tonk, and say "пох**!" when it comes to visibility? And the Ka-50 "Stronk Stalinium Tonk" talk got me thinking... With the exception of the Gazelle we have no Western attack helicopter! And the Gazelle isn't even a proper attack helicopter, it's a light-attack/scout helo! :cry: So AH-1 or AH-64 anybody?

Now I just wanted to ask... Panavia Tornado or MiG-23? So as far as I know the MiG-23 out-climbs, out-turns, and out-speeds the 9 years newer Tornado. Depending on which variants of the Tornado and MiG-23 we (in this unlikely scenario) get it also out-ranges it in BVR, and unlike the Tornado provides "sneak" capability. But the Tornado would out-range (fuel) the MiG-23, with better multi-role capability (the MiG-23 had none, it was purely an A-A or A-G platform). And again according to the variants we would get out-ranges the MiG-23 in BVR. Also an added bonus would be multi-crew. So which would be better for a module? Honestly I could go either way, both are awesome!

Well, the MiG-19 weighed only 8,662 kg at MTOW. The F-4 on the other hand 28,030 kg, at MTOW. That's roughly 3,4 times more than the MiG-19. So the relatively weak 63,6 kN output of both Tumansky RD-9B combined in AB got compensated for in weight. And because of the low weight, and the relatively small wings (compared to the F-4) still achieved a better wing-loading. So the MiG-19 should be able to beat the F-4 in close quarters no problem. So in this kind of scenario the only hope of the F-4 is to keep range and engage at BVR. Which should be easy if not sneaked up upon, because the F-4 (2,370 km/h top speed) could out-speed the MiG-19 (1,452 km/h top speed) by 0.875 Mach.:thumbup: