Mortisrose

I found this video of the Su-7 which had the same NR-30 cannons at 4:39

Yeah I was thinking that as well. Played at 1/4 speed, though difficult to make out from the grainy footage it appears to me the gasses are moving around the cockpit over the wing/fuselage and towards the tail. It would be useful to find another video of the NR-30 firing for comparison. I was wondering when you said that because I've seen cutaways and a diagram in the Russian manual of the MiG-19 showing a belt of ammunition running down almost its entire length of wing. The 3rd cannon of the S variant appears have rounds stored in a box magazine like the MiG 15, 17.

He says the guns fire in bursts partly due to its loading via stripper clips. Is this accurate? Also guns muzzle flash and smoke effect is rather small (as seen at 16:50, 18:22, 18:35) when in reality they were quite pronounced as seen below in video at 29:04

That's what I thought at first but it's correct, and the sensor has 324 written on it. Maybe these are defective. I might buy another sensor and see how that works out.

The MiG-19S (Farmer C) had 3 x 30mm cannons, only the PM (Farmer E) had guided missiles, rockets on the P (Farmer B) were unguided.

Thanks everyone that have helped me create this cougar throttle mod with MMjoy: It is now a standalone controller with 14 more switches(2x 3 position switches) and 3 extra axes on the sides of the base. It uses a Leonardo for the switches (button matrix) on the base and a pro-micro bypassing the old 8-bit electronics for the throttle grip. Everything works good except the hall sensor I tried to use for the throttle acts not much better than a switch. I'm using the old potentiometer for the throttle now. I tested the leads on the sensor: vcc to ground is 4.6v, vcc to output is 3.6v and increases to 3.96v when the magnet is up against the sensor. The hall sensor is an a1324lua-t and the magnets are N52 12 x 1mm disk stack together. The sensor does not seem to be very sensitive at all; I need at least 4-5 stacked to get any a change in output, other magnets I found had no effect on the sensor. I've tried two different pro-micros and 1324 sensors and with same result.

The MiG-19S has a more simple gunnery radar similar to the F-86 radar. S is somewhat better in speed, maneuverability, range, ceiling, endurance.

In the event of hydraulic pressure loss in both main and booster systems, an electric servo-mechanism (APS-4 or APS-4MD) powers the stabilizer. Is this emergency system simulated?

I noticed on the latest 3 pictures on FB the R-3S missiles now look untextured and still hanging on double rails. Hopefully these missiles will be replaced with a more accurate performing version of the R-3S than the mostly over-performing one in DCS now.

Looks like the R-3S missile comes pre-attached to the rail when loaded in game as it's like that for MiG-21 and L-39ZA. The missiles shown on page one have one rail and look like Aim-9B's and appear more correctly attached.

Turning time of MiG-19S at 5,000m stated to be 35 seconds with afterburner vs 32 seconds of the MiG-17 at same altitude. Not sure about sea level or the MiG-19P variant. Also read that MiG-19S was stated to have dangerous spin characteristics and quite willing to spin sometimes flat and inverted. So that may be something to watch out for when turn fighting.

It looks outstanding! I really like the rugged industrial look this MiG has.

Yeah, range for MiG-19S at 1000m is said to be 840 km with and 500 km without drop tanks at 780-880 kph; the P version would likely be a bit worse in range. MiG-19P climb rate was very good for its time climbing to 10,000m in 1.2 min.

Range at 14,000 m on internal fuel is stated at 1,100 km, w/drop tanks is 1,800 - 1,910 km. The 760l external tanks could only be filled to 540l because of weight limitations on take-off.

From what I read MiG-19P can carry: 2x R-3S, 2x PTB-760l drop tanks 2x R-3S, 2x ORO-57K rocket pods (8x S-5 ea.), 2x760l 2x RS-2, 2x 760l (limited number of MiG-19P's) 2x ORO-57K, 2x 400l 2x ORO-57K, 2x 760l 2x ORO-57K 4x ORO-57K 2x FAB-50 bomb or OFAB-50 bomb 2x OFAB-100M bomb 2x FAB-250M bomb 2x 400l 2x 760l 2x NR 30mm cannons with 70 RPG 2170l internal fuel

Only in PG map. I tried Caucasus and Nevada over Lake Mead and noticed no artifacts in those maps.

Overstratos released 8k Mig-15 skins a couple years ago: https://forums.eagle.ru/showthread.php?t=177801 that look incredible and are some of my favorite skins, unfortunately the link to download is dead.

I'm having an issue with external sound, it sounds like a "hair-dryer on low setting" externally when turned to the back of the plane, the sound mod I was using no longer works; the mod stopped working recently.

The little black "deblock guns" button near the bottom on the center pedestal I cannot find in the control bindings list.

I noticed when flying over water the screen is faintly divided into four quadrants: I enhanced the contrast to help show the lines dividing the screen.

Yes, max range under-performance at low altitudes, over-performance at higher altitudes. R-3S and Aim-9B at 5 km, Mach 1.3 launch speed: R-3S: Max speed: M 2.4 in 7 sec.; Range: 3.4 km; M 1.1 over launch speed; At +20 sec. flight: M 0.8; M 1.6 speed reduction from top speed, Detonation time: 22 sec. Aim-9B: Max speed: M 2.8 in 3 sec.; Range: 3.4 km; M 1.5 over launch speed; At +20sec. flight: M 0.8, M 2.0 speed reduction from top speed; Detonation time: 25 sec. Whats interesting is both missiles after 20 seconds of flight are traveling at almost the same speed and reached same range even though the Aim-9B reached M 0.4 higher speed in less than half the time. At +20 seconds Aim-9B is dropping at 2.2 deg/s out of the sky, R-3S is still flying straight ahead. It appears the Sidewinder has more drag, about 22% if taken the difference between speed reduction of M 2 and 1.6 from top speed. Both missiles should have near the same weight, 165 lb (74.8 kg) Aim-9B and 75.3 kg R-3S. Here are both missiles at +20 after launch:

Report I made concerning the R-3S: Also posted in Leatherneck Bugtracker Tacview files to go with report here: https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1Up0Ncryq7KA9ejZ1PPV0LIM1I-p5AxmR Correction: *Aim-9B at 5km was launched at M 1.3, target M 1.0* R-3S Performance.pdf

"Canopy frosting over if cockpit temperature too low." That sounds interesting, is this a graphical effect of the canopy glass becoming more opaque over time?

Also I've noticed the Motor of the R-3S runs for about 6 seconds before burning out. Acceleration is slower when compared to GAR-8 with the GAR-8's motor burning out in about 3 seconds or less and accelerating faster. This can be seen in the graph I posted in post #4. According to the document (if I'm reading it correctly translated) from 2005 linked in Hiromachi's post #21 the R-3S motor should run for 1.7 - 3.3 seconds depending on charge temperature as per section 1.4.2., 2.4.1, and shown in 2.4.2 1.4.2 page 6: "...depending on the temperature of the charge, works for 1.7 - 3.3 s." 2.4.1 page 34: Engine running time: at charge temperature + 60С ... 1.7s at a charge temperature of –54 ° C ... 3.2 s Section 2.4.2 on page 37 shows a graph to support this: Fig. 33.

A link to my Tacview files from 2016-01-10 to 2017-06-12 https://drive.google.com/drive/folders/1fJXBriFlvknyA-JXJfbeexnjZFsd_I2g?usp=sharing Tacview20160812 is when I first noticed a change in missiles.