-Martin-

It would be great even if they did B-47E only as an AI. We really need more period bombers in DCS. It would make a great target for the upcoming Mig-19.

I just played your server for at least an hour. I had my ping around 290. Many people were on the server, no issues or crashes. I understand that the server needs to run well, but as I cannot influence where I live I hope that performance issues could be addressed by the ED rather than by ping limits.

Oh please do not do it :(. Your server is one of the few I fly (and still can due to this ping-barring elsewhere) and this would literally kill DCS MP for me.

Actually, also the localiser needle on NPP works incorrectly, at least according to the manual ( p.118 ) and how it works in L-39. On the first picture above it should be to the left of the middle line, because you need to turn left to align with the runway. Look at the cue on the top of KPP: it is to the left and this should be consistent with NPP. Furthermore, turning on the command landing mode on SAU does not make the flight director needles on KPP to actually direct you in the RSBN landing mode, they remain fixed. It appears that there are a fair amount of bugs surrounding the RSBN system. :(

Your solution looks great to me, I would find a bigger hood disturbing.

Would you consider adding also some AI planes to shoot at? Interesting and historical choice could be the B-47 bomber or the related RB-47 reconnaissance plane. I do not want to sound greedy by bombarding you with further requests, surely the Mig-19 variants and your future projects have priority. But how can we really enjoy your plane if we do not have a proper environment to fly it in? Shooting at C-130 transport planes as we do with our Mig-15 will quickly become unsatisfying in my opinion.

Would not it be better if you removed Aim-9M? That smokeless missile is years ahead of anything that Mig-21 can employ.

Yes, it was around for ages. I reported it in https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=180666 but, unfortunately, the problem appears to be left unnoticed by the ED. It also seems to me that L-39 is not high on the ED's priority list. It is one of few aircraft that still has no rain effects on canopy. Additionally, I would love to see tracer effects as seen on Mig-21 and Mig-15 implemented to its gun, but I do not know if that is actually realistic.

Dear SeaQuark, I was recently trying to connect to your server that you have kindly made available also on the open-beta branch but with no success. I was wondering if you know about the problem. I have noticed that the counter that shows how long the server was running is frozen at 0. I miss this great server, and shame that everyone is flying the Hornet nowadays.

Aries, Yes, IFF stands for Identification Friend or Foe. On the ACG server Bluefor and Redfor use different airframes so identification is performed visually, no need for an IFF capable radar. With Mirage you could go beyond visual range on say the 104th Phoenix server, neither L-39 nor F5 have any place there, not even in a ground attack role due to heavy AA. I do not own Mirage, but from what I read it is not the most complicated plane and it is quite popular as thus far it is the only full fidelity beyond visual range fighter. It appears that I recall that the flight model changed couple of times, if that says anything about the quality, but otherwise it should be a quite polished module. Have a look at the dedicated forum for more details. If I were to consider Mirage, I would wait for F/A-18, but that will be a complicated plane indeed. I have not seen any squadron using L-39, and I cannot offer you to form one as for family reasons I do not have much time to fly anymore. But there are other people flying L-39, maybe you could make some friends.

Dear Aries, Guessing by your previous choice of Su27 and Ka50, you might have a thing for the East and the metric system, as I do. Should that be the case, L-39 is the best full fidelity plane you can get from that side. I have about 50 hours on that plane in multiplayer, not kidding, on the ACG Cold War server. I killed more F-5s in my L-39 than in my Mig-21. Although other planes are better, thanks to its great turn rate you can get kills consistently, and you would not feel bad by being shot down by better airframes. You have rockets and a cannon for secondary ground pounding, which is doable on that server as there is no strong AA presence. There are great things you can do in singleplayer, too. There is a training mission where you do a navigation flight exclusively by instruments, you can do zero visibility landings using RSBN navigation system, you can fly from the instructor seat at the back, you can perfect areobatic figures. It is a great plane that one can truly love. Nevertheless, I really would not want you be disappointed again. If you do not mind to fly on the, well, imperial side, as others have mentioned, F5 is overall a better plane with systems such as radar and RWR, with a great gun, and with the flight model that is perhaps as good as the highly acclaimed model of L-39. But it is not a perfect plane either, with no autopilot and with no IFF. But you will not find those on L-39 either. I hope that you can make an informed decision.

If I read the following correctly (emphasis mine), the catapult launcher will sadly not be included. But I would very much want it, too. It would make the plane more attractive:

Dear Overstratos, I was wondering if you could together with your promising Mig-19p release an AI RB-47 reconnaissance plane derived from the B-47 bomber. A plane on its own in DCS is not as enjoyable, as experience showed us. Although it will be great to fly your Mig-19p against say F-5s, and if you take inspiration from how Mig-15 and L-39 are modeled (cockpit, flight and damage models) many would fall in love with your plane anyway, having an actual target to intercept in this interceptor would be needed to convince many others to get it, and more importantly, to stay with it. I would imagine that a release trailer where a Mig-19p is intercepting an RB-47 as its tail gun is shooting back would get a lot of attention. If you think that it is not your responsibility and the ED's job, given how far the time span they cover is stretched, I would argue that 3D party developers should start supplementing their planes with additional AI assets. We still have no bomber to intercept in our Mig-15. Finally, the RB-47 reconnaissance plane is absolutely the most realistic target for interception, having flown reconnaissance missions around the Soviet Union from 1952 to 1965; in fact, one being shot down by a very Mig-19. Thank you for considering this suggestion.

Dear all, On my end, and during normal game-play, I see on external view all pilot animations; head movement, stick movement, pedal movement, and previously mentioned arm lifting. This is for both a player and AI. Nevertheless, during the track reply, I saw only stick movement animations; no head movement. This must be a reply related bug.

Mr Wags confirmed on a Steam forum that the MP issue will be fixed in the next update, actually multiple times over the course of the last week: `A 2.5 patch is planned for this week that will address the MP issue for 2.5 on Steam.' He also mentioned in one of his interviews that the Steam open beta version is receiving updates with only a 24 hour delay in comparison to the ED version, which I can confirm. Additionally, some recent new modules have been released relatively quickly on Steam. What is better about the Steam version is that you can enjoy fast downloading and hassle free Steam copy protection. So overall the Steam version is in my opinion quite good and ballanced with the ED version. In fact, users of the ED stable version still do not have 2.5 which is equal to Steam users on the corresponding stable version.

4 and 5. Depends on the situation. But if you fly MP on the ACG cold war server, then I would take at most one R-3R, as most people stay low where you cannot deploy your radar. Occasionally you will find an inexperienced player flying high. I usually take 4 R-60M, 1 R-3R and 1 R-13M1. R-60M is quite different to Aim-9L. It has a much shorter range and you cannot hit with it targets running away. That is why I take one R-13M1 (upgraded R-3S). On the other hand, R-60M turns extremely well as it accelerates faster than R-3S family. In any case, stay low, try to shoot your R-60Ms at the enemy as soon as you are close enough, regardless of aspect, as your missile with take care of turning and you will not be able to keep turning with planes like F5 and A10.

I have recently realised that I can use the Mig-21's radar in the beam mode to improve accuracy of shooting unguided rockets over a hilly terrain. The targeting without radar ranging relies on the radio altimeter which might be inaccurate if the terrain is not flat. I never realised ...

SeaQuark, I just wanted to drop by and say that as one of those lonely Mig-15 pilots I enjoy the server and I was fairly impressed by the effort you put into creating an immersive environment. In particular, I like shooting down mockup bombers. I just wish those were real with working gunners.

You are quite right that they did not mention it in the manual, that selecting pylons lights up the AOA light, given the cannon is powered. I just observed this behaviour during many hours flying the Albatros, probably my favourite plane. Nevertheless, from the manual it is clear that the AOA light is related only to the cannon and not to missiles. It is the AOL indicator that lights up below 400 IAS, below which the cannon does not fire (unless you override the limiter by that button on the central pedestal). Missiles have a different indicator to the left of the gunsight that says `stand alert' if you are above 310 IAS, and below which you are unable to fire them. In short, I knew it must be related to the cannon, since the AOA light has nothing to do with missiles. Good luck flying the L-39.

Dear Portman, My guess is that you have flipped also the GS-23 Cannon Arm/Safe switch when you set up your two missile heating and glowing switches. Now, selecting outer pylons to fire your missiles prevents the cannon from firing and that is also indicated by the AOA lamp, as any other situation that prevents cannon from firing. In short, try to set GS-23 Cannon switch to the Safe position. By the way, there is another way how to disable the lamp, namely to press the unblock guns button on the central pedestal. But that may cause your cannon to fire as well when you do not want to.

They changed my Mig to a biplane, who would not complain. Although now I out-turn F5 Grumman, they have not installed a machine gun. Many new modules were laid down, while we need a bomber to shot down. They changed my Mig to a biplane, I am sorry that I complain.

Some files inside the gazelle folder have been really edited. For example, in gazelle doc folder, I have a new file explaining how to enter polar coordinates to NADIR. I have tested it and it works.

My DCS version on Steam has been updated to 1.5.7.10872 since Friday.

It seems to me that there is no such an indicator. I assume that there is a switch for it but it is not animated. Given that some other switches are actually animated it would be great if they could consider adding also this one.

I am experiencing the same bug. It is really annoying, and it costed me my virtual plane multiple times on an MP server. Actually I am not sure if this bug is present in SP, I fly MP almost exclusively. I have personally observed that there is some randomness to it, that is I found no way to replicate the bug, but it appears that it has something to do with the starting sequence. What works for me personally to make the dispenser releasing countermeasures is to wait for rearming to finish before starting up the engine, let the engine to spool up before turning on gyros, and finally let them to start spinning before flipping the AC power on. I appreciate the other comments offering simple remedies to this problem such as flipping the safety cover, presumably not everyone is affected by this bug, it is only an MP issue or the particular way the plane is started prevent the bug from occurring, but let me assure you that we are not forgetting any trivial matter, the bug is really present there for us.